Long-Term Improvement in Localization for Cochlear Implant Users with Single-Sided Deafness

Association of Tonotopic Mismatch With the Speech Recognition of Cochlear Implant Users With Unilateral Hearing Loss

OBJECTIVE

Review the relationship of tonotopic mismatch with the speech recognition of cochlear implant (CI) users with unilateral hearing loss (UHL; also known as single-sided deafness).

PATIENTS

Twenty-seven adults (≥18 yr of age) with late-onset UHL.

INTERVENTION

Cochlear implantation.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Speech recognition was assessed at 6 months post-activation with consonant-nucleus-consonant (CNC) words in the CI alone condition (contralateral ear masked). In the combined condition (CI plus the normal-hearing ear), masked speech recognition was assessed using AzBio sentences in a 10-talker masker (0-dB signal-to-noise ratio) in three target-to-masker configurations. Tonotopic mismatch was calculated as the semitone deviation between the center filter frequency and the cochlear place frequency of the most apical electrode contact.

RESULTS

There was a significant, negative association between tonotopic mismatch and CNC scores (r27= -0.43, p = 0.013) and masked speech recognition when the target was from the front and the masker was presented toward the normal-hearing ear (r27= -0.36, p = 0.033).

CONCLUSIONS

The speech recognition of adult CI users with UHL in the CI alone and bilateral listening conditions may be significantly influenced by tonotopic mismatches. These findings support the need for prospective investigation of methods to reduce or eliminate tonotopic mismatches (e.g., implantation of electrode arrays that approximate cochlear place and/or individualized mapping of filter frequencies) for CI users with UHL.

Cochlear and Bone Conduction Implants in Asymmetric Hearing Loss and Single-Sided Deafness: Effects on Localization, Speech in Noise, and Quality of Life

BACKGROUND

Single-sided deafness (SSD) and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL) impair spatial hearing and speech perception, often reducing quality of life. Cochlear implants (CIs) and bone conduction implants (BCIs) are rehabilitation options used in SSD and AHL to improve auditory perception and support functional integration in daily life.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to evaluate hearing outcomes after auditory implantation in SSD and AHL patients, focusing on localization accuracy, speech-in-noise understanding, tinnitus relief, and perceived benefit.

METHODS

In this longitudinal observational study, 37 patients (adults and children) received a CI or a BCI according to clinical indications. Outcomes included localization and spatial speech-in-noise assessment, tinnitus ratings, and SSQ12 scores. Statistical analyses used parametric and non-parametric tests (p < 0.05).

RESULTS

In adult CI users, localization error significantly decreased from 81.9° ± 15.8° to 43.7° ± 13.5° (p < 0.001). In children, regardless of the implant type (CI or BCI), localization error improved from 74.3° to 44.8°, indicating a consistent spatial benefit. In adult BCI users, localization error decreased from 74.6° to 69.2°, but the improvement did not reach statistical significance. Tinnitus severity, measured on a 10-point VAS scale, decreased significantly in CI users (mean reduction: 2.8 ± 2.0, p < 0.001), while changes in BCI users were small and of limited clinical relevance. SSQ12B/C scores improved in all adult groups, with the largest gains observed in spatial hearing for CI users (2.1 ± 1.2) and in speech understanding for BCI users (1.6 ± 0.9); children reported high benefits across all domains. Head shadow yielded the most consistent benefit across all groups (up to 4.9 dB in adult CI users, 3.8 dB in adult BCI users, and 4.6 dB in children). Although binaural effects were smaller in BCI users, positive gains were observed, especially in pediatric cases. Correlation analysis showed that daily device use positively predicted SSQ12 improvement (r = 0.57) and tinnitus relief (r = 0.42), while longer deafness duration was associated with poorer localization outcomes (r = -0.48).

CONCLUSIONS

CIs and BCIs provide measurable benefits in SSD and AHL rehabilitation. Outcomes vary with age, device, and deafness duration, underscoring the need for early intervention and consistent auditory input.

Benefits of Cochlear Implantation for Older Adults With Asymmetric Hearing Loss

OBJECTIVE(S)

FDA-approved indications for cochlear implantation include patients with severe-to-profound unilateral hearing loss (UHL) or asymmetric hearing loss (AHL); however, these indications are not covered for Medicare beneficiaries. We assessed the outcomes of cochlear implant (CI) use for older adults with UHL or AHL.

METHODS

Eighteen older adults (≥65 years of age at surgery) with UHL/AHL participated in a prospective, longitudinal investigation evaluating outcomes of CI use. Speech recognition for the affected ear was evaluated with consonant-nucleus-consonant (CNC) words. Spatial hearing was assessed with measures of sound source localization and sentence recognition in noise. The target sentence was presented from the front and the masker was either co-located with the target (SoNo), presented toward the affected ear (SoNci) or contralateral ear (SoNcontra). Perceived benefit was assessed with the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing scale (SSQ) and the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI).

RESULTS

Participants experienced significant improvements with CI use for CNC words (mean [SD]; preop: 8% [10%], 1 yr: 51% [22%], 5 yr: 50% [19%]), masked sentence recognition (SoNcontra preop: 5% [6%], 1 yr: 22% [15%], 5 yr: 41% [14%]), and localization (preop: 76° [18°], 1 yr: 40° [11°], 5 yr: 41° [14°]), and reported significant improvements in hearing abilities (SSQ Spatial Hearing preop: 3 [1], 1 yr: 6 [2], 5 yr: 6 [2]) and tinnitus severity (THI preop: 16 [18], 1 yr: 4 [14], 5 yr: 6 [12]).

CONCLUSION

Older adults with UHL/AHL experience significant improvements in speech recognition, spatial hearing, and subjective perceptions (e.g., hearing abilities and tinnitus severity) with a CI as compared to pre-operative abilities.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4 Laryngoscope, 135:352-360, 2025.

Brazilian Society of Otology task force - single sided deafness - recommendations based on strength of evidence

OBJECTIVE

To make evidence-based recommendations for the treatment of Single-Sided Deafness (SSD) in children and adults.

METHODS

Task force members were instructed on knowledge synthesis methods, including electronic database search, review and selection of relevant citations, and critical appraisal of selected studies. Articles written in English or Portuguese on SSD were eligible for inclusion. The American College of Physicians' guideline grading system and the American Thyroid Association's guideline criteria were used for critical appraisal of evidence and recommendations for therapeutic interventions.

RESULTS

The topics were divided into 3 parts: (1) Impact of SSD in children; (2) Impact of SSD in adults; and (3) SSD in patients with temporal bone tumors.

CONCLUSIONS

Decision-making for patients with SSD is complex and multifactorial. The lack of consensus on the quality of outcomes and on which measurement tools to use hinders a proper comparison of different treatment options. Contralateral routing of signal hearing aids and bone conduction devices can alleviate the head shadow effect and improve sound awareness and signal-to-noise ratio in the affected ear. However, they cannot restore binaural hearing. Cochlear implants can restore binaural hearing, producing significant improvements in speech perception, spatial localization of sound, tinnitus control, and overall quality of life. However, cochlear implantation is not recommended in cases of cochlear nerve deficiency, a relatively common cause of congenital SSD.

Prospective study of sound localisation in patients with single sided deafness and asymmetric hearing loss treated with cochlear implant

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Sound localization plays a crucial role in our daily lives, enabling us to recognize voices, respond to alarming situations, avoid dangers, and navigate towards specific signals. However, this ability is compromised in patients with Single-Sided Deafness (SSD) and Asymmetric Hearing Loss (AHL), negatively impacting their daily functioning. The main objective of the study was to quantify the degree of sound source localization in patients with single-sided deafness or asymmetric hearing loss using a Cochlear Implant (CI) and to compare between the two subgroups.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a prospective, longitudinal, observational, single-center study involving adult patients diagnosed with profound unilateral or asymmetric sensorineural hearing loss who underwent cochlear implantation. Sound localization was assessed in a chamber equipped with seven speakers evenly distributed from -90º to 90º. Stimuli were presented at 1000 Hz and intensities of 65 dB, 70 dB, and 75 dB. Each stimulus was presented only once per speaker, totaling 21 presentations. The number of correct responses at different intensities was recorded, and angular error in degrees was calculated to determine the mean angular distance between the patient-indicated speaker and the speaker presenting the stimulus. Both assessments were conducted preoperatively without a cochlear implant and two years post-implantation.

RESULTS

The total sample comprised 20 patients, with 9 assigned to the SSD group and 11 to the AHL group. The Preoperative Pure Tone Average (PTA) in free field was 31.7 dB in the SSD group and 41.8 dB in the AHL group. There was a statistically significant improvement in sound localization ability and angular error with the use of the cochlear implant at all intensities in both SSD and AHL subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

Cochlear implantation in patients with SSD and AHL enhances sound localization, reducing mean angular error and increasing the number of correct sound localization responses.

Localization and Speech-in-Noise Performance in a Virtual Reality Test Environment: A Pilot Study of Adults With Single-Sided Deafness Using a Cochlear Implant

PURPOSE

The purpose of this exploratory study was to (a) construct a virtual reality (VR) test environment to measure speech recognition in noise (SIN) and localization, and (b) use the VR test environment to establish degree of binaural hearing benefit among a small number of adults with single-sided deafness (SSD) using a cochlear implant (CI).

METHOD

This pilot study included five adults implanted for SSD. The test environment was composed of an eight-speaker array that delivered restaurant noise and Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers sentences. VR head-mounted display goggles delivered a video recording of a busy restaurant. Participants completed SIN and localization in two conditions: (a) normal-hearing ear and a CI on the contralateral SSD side (CI-ON) and (b) normal-hearing ear and unaided on the contralateral SSD side (CI-OFF).

RESULTS

Overall, CI benefits for SIN and localization within the VR test environment were improved for some participants, although not all. CI benefit for SIN and localization was dependent on speaker location.

CONCLUSIONS

VR test environments present new opportunities for studying SIN and localization abilities in participants with CIs. This pilot study shows that, within a VR test environment, degree of CI benefit among SSD participants for SIN and localization varies across speaker location and across participants.

Long-Term Outcome of Cochlear Implantation in Children With Congenital, Perilingual, and Postlingual Single-Sided Deafness

OBJECTIVES

We investigated the long-term outcomes of children with single-sided deafness (SSD) after cochlear implant (CI) surgery, during and after rehabilitation, and compared the results of children with congenital, perilingual, and postlingual SSD. We evaluated the impact of SSD at age at onset and duration of deafness on their performance.

DESIGN

Thirty-six children with SSD treated with CI participated in the study: 20 had congenital, seven perilingual (defined: >0 to 4 years), and nine had postlingual deafness (defined as >4 years of age). Their outcome with CI were measured on both subjective and objective scales: duration of device use, speech intelligibility in noise and in quiet, bilateral hearing and localization ability, quality of life and hearing, presence and loudness of tinnitus, and hearing ability of the better hearing ear.

RESULTS

After a mean follow-up time of 4.75 years, 32 of the 36 children used their CI on a regular basis. The remaining four children were nonusers. These children had congenital SSD and were older than three years at the time of CI surgery. Overall, for congenital/perilingual and postlingual SSD, speech intelligibility in noise and the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) speech subscore were significantly improved, as were their subjective and objective localization ability and hearing-related quality of life. Children with postlingual SSD benefited from the CI with regard to speech intelligibility, SSQ speech/spatial/total score, and localization error, and children with congenital SSD showed better results with a short duration of deafness of less than 3 years compared with those with a longer deafness period.

CONCLUSIONS

Cochlear implantation is a successful treatment for children with congenital/perilingual or postlingual SSD. Results largely differed with respect to the onset and duration of deafness, and better outcomes were achieved by children with postlingual SSD and with a short duration of deafness. Our data also confirmed that children with congenital SSD should be implanted with a CI within three years of age.

Single-Sided Deafness and Hearing Rehabilitation Modalities: Contralateral Routing of Signal Devices, Bone Conduction Devices, and Cochlear Implants

Single sided deafness (SSD) is characterized by significant sensorineural hearing loss, severe or profound, in only one ear. SSD adversely affects various aspects of auditory perception, including causing impairment in sound localization, difficulties with speech comprehension in noisy environments, and decreased spatial awareness, resulting in a significant decline in overall quality of life (QoL). Several treatment options are available for SSD, including cochlear implants (CI), contralateral routing of signal (CROS), and bone conduction devices (BCD). The lack of consensus on outcome domains and measurement tools complicates treatment comparisons and decision-making. This narrative overview aims to summarize the treatment options available for SSD in adult and pediatric populations, discussing their respective advantages and disadvantages. Rerouting devices (CROS and BCD) attenuate the effects of head shadow and improve sound awareness and signal-to-noise ratio in the affected ear; however, they cannot restore binaural hearing. CROS devices, being non-implantable, are the least invasive option. Cochlear implantation is the only strategy that can restore binaural hearing, delivering significant improvements in speech perception, spatial localization, tinnitus control, and overall QoL. Comprehensive preoperative counseling, including a discussion of alternative technologies, implications of no treatment, expectations, and auditory training, is critical to optimizing therapeutic outcomes.

Sound Localization in Single-Sided Deafness; Outcomes of a Randomized Controlled Trial on the Comparison Between Cochlear Implantation, Bone Conduction Devices, and Contralateral Routing of Signals Hearing Aids

There is currently a lack of prospective studies comparing multiple treatment options for single-sided deafness (SSD) in terms of long-term sound localization outcomes. This randomized controlled trial (RCT) aims to compare the objective and subjective sound localization abilities of SSD patients treated with a cochlear implant (CI), a bone conduction device (BCD), a contralateral routing of signals (CROS) hearing aid, or no treatment after two years of follow-up. About 120 eligible patients were randomized to cochlear implantation or to a trial period with first a BCD on a headband, then a CROS (or vice versa). After the trial periods, participants opted for a surgically implanted BCD, a CROS, or no treatment. Sound localization accuracy (in three configurations, calculated as percentage correct and root-mean squared error in degrees) and subjective spatial hearing (subscale of the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of hearing (SSQ) questionnaire) were assessed at baseline and after 24 months of follow-up. At the start of follow-up, 28 participants were implanted with a CI, 25 with a BCD, 34 chose a CROS, and 26 opted for no treatment. Participants in the CI group showed better sound localization accuracy and subjective spatial hearing compared to participants in the BCD, CROS, and no-treatment groups at 24 months. Participants in the CI and CROS groups showed improved subjective spatial hearing at 24 months compared to baseline. To conclude, CI outperformed the BCD, CROS, and no-treatment groups in terms of sound localization accuracy and subjective spatial hearing in SSD patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION Netherlands Trial Register (https://onderzoekmetmensen.nl): NL4457, CINGLE trial.

Cochlear Implantation for Unilateral and Asymmetric Hearing Loss: Long-Term Subjective Benefit

OBJECTIVES

Assess the long-term patterns of perceived tinnitus severity and subjective benefit for adult cochlear implant (CI) users with asymmetric or unilateral hearing loss (AHL or UHL).

METHODS

Forty adults underwent cochlear implantation as part of a prospective clinical trial assessing the outcomes of CI use in cases of AHL (n = 20) and UHL (n = 20). Subjective measures included the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI), the Speech, Spatial, & Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ), and the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB). Responses were obtained preoperatively and at routine intervals out to 5 years post-activation.

RESULTS

For subjective benefit, participants with AHL and UHL reported a significant improvement as compared to preoperative abilities, which was maintained with long-term CI use. For perceived tinnitus severity, participants with AHL and UHL reported a significant reduction with CI use as compared to preoperative perceptions. The perceived tinnitus severity significantly differed for the AHL and UHL cohorts over time. This pattern of results is likely influenced by the worse perceived severity levels for the UHL cohort preoperatively and the fluctuating perceived severity levels for some participants in the AHL cohort post-activation.

CONCLUSION

Adults with AHL and UHL report an early, significant reduction in perceived tinnitus severity and improvement in quality of life with CI use that is generally maintained with long-term device use. Questionnaires such as the THI, SSQ, and APHAB may contribute to a more holistic assessment of the benefits of cochlear implantation in this population.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2 Laryngoscope, 133:2792-2797, 2023.

Long-Term Binaural Hearing Improvements for Cochlear Implant Users with Asymmetric Hearing Loss

OBJECTIVE

To assess long-term binaural hearing abilities for cochlear implant (CI) users with unilateral hearing loss (UHL) or asymmetric hearing loss (AHL).

METHODS

A prospective, longitudinal, repeated measures study was completed at a tertiary referral center evaluating adults with UHL or AHL undergoing cochlear implantation. Binaural hearing abilities were assessed with masked speech recognition tasks using AzBio sentences in a 10-talker masker. Performance was evaluated as the ability to benefit from spatial release from masking (SRM). SRM was calculated as the difference in scores when the masker was presented toward the CI-ear (SRMci ) or the contralateral ear (SRMcontra ) relative to the co-located condition (0°). Assessments were completed pre-operatively and at annual intervals out to 5 years post-activation.

RESULTS

Twenty UHL and 19 AHL participants were included in the study. Linear Mixed Models showed significant main effects of interval and group for SRMcontra . There was a significant interaction between interval and group, with UHL participants reaching asymptotic performance early and AHL participants demonstrating continued growth in binaural abilities to 5 years post-activation. The improvement in SRM showed a significant positive correlation with contralateral unaided hearing thresholds (p = 0.050) as well as age at implantation (p = 0.031).

CONCLUSIONS

CI recipients with UHL and AHL showed improved SRM with long-term device use. The time course of improvement varied by cohort, with the UHL cohort reaching asymptotic performance early and the AHL cohort continuing to improve beyond 1 year. Differences between cohorts could be driven by differences in age at implantation as well as contralateral unaided hearing thresholds.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3 Laryngoscope, 133:1480-1485, 2023.

Towards a Consensus on an ICF-Based Classification System for Horizontal Sound-Source Localization

The study aimed to develop a consensus classification system for the reporting of sound localization testing results, especially in the field of cochlear implantation. Against the background of an overview of the wide variations present in localization testing procedures and reporting metrics, a novel classification system was proposed to report localization errors according to the widely accepted International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) framework. The obtained HEARRING_LOC_ICF scale includes the ICF graded scale: 0 (no impairment), 1 (mild impairment), 2 (moderate impairment), 3 (severe impairment), and 4 (complete impairment). Improvement of comparability of localization results across institutes, localization testing setups, and listeners was demonstrated by applying the classification system retrospectively to data obtained from cohorts of normal-hearing and cochlear implant listeners at our institutes. The application of our classification system will help to facilitate multi-center studies, as well as allowing better meta-analyses of data, resulting in improved evidence-based practice in the field.

Cochlear implantation for paediatric and adult cases of unilateral and asymmetric hearing loss

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Children and adults with unilateral or asymmetric hearing loss (UHL/AHL) have poorer spatial hearing (e.g. speech understanding in complex maskers and localization) and quality of life compared with peers with normal hearing bilaterally. Patients with UHL/AHL experience limited benefits with contralateral-routing technologies (e.g. bone conduction, CROS hearing aid systems). Cochlear implantation allows for stimulation of the auditory pathway for the poorer hearing ear. The present study reviews the recent literature on outcomes of cochlear implant use for recipients with UHL/AHL.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent research corroborates previous investigations of the significant benefits on measures of spatial hearing, tinnitus severity and quality of life for adult cochlear implant recipients. These benefits are also observed in pediatric cochlear implant recipients, with an association of better outcomes with younger ages at implantation for congenital cases and shorter durations of UHL/AHL for acquired cases. In addition, randomized trials demonstrate better outcomes with cochlear implant use versus contralateral-routing technologies.

SUMMARY

Cochlear implantation supports better spatial hearing and quality of life in children and adults with UHL/AHL as compared to alternative listening conditions. Current research supports the expansion of candidacy criteria and insurance coverage for cochlear implantation for patients with UHL/AHL to improve their binaural hearing.