Interaural Time Difference Perception with a Cochlear Implant and a Normal Ear

Auditory Localization Performance in Cochlear Implant Recipients With Single-Sided Deafness: The Challenges and Limitations of Current Outcome Metrics

HYPOTHESIS

Acoustic localization accuracy metrics currently employed in clinical literature both overestimate and underestimate performance benefit of cochlear implantation (CI) for single-sided deafness (SSD).

BACKGROUND

Although localization in SSD with CI has been investigated, performance characterization has relied heavily on average error. Although attractively concise, this measure may misrepresent performance. Here, we characterize frequency-specific localization on a granular level in subjects with CI for SSD as a critical analysis of localization outcome metrics.

METHODS

Eight CI recipients with SSD were recruited. Stimuli of broadband (BBN) and narrowband noise (NBN) at low (500 Hz), mid (1000 Hz), and high (4000 Hz) frequencies were presented in a semianechoic chamber. Localization accuracy was quantified in mean angular error (MAE) and linear regression slope.

RESULTS

Use of a CI for SSD subjects improved localization performance by slope for all stimuli ( p ≤ 0.0033) to a level that was equal to normal-hearing controls at 1 and 4 kHz ( p ≥ 0.2281). MAE was also significantly improved for SSD subjects using CI for BBN stimuli ( p ≪ 0.0001); however, no statistically significant improvement in MAE was seen for NBN ( p ≥ 0.5773) with CI use. Descriptive analysis of individual subject performance highlights the reasons for contradictory results.

CONCLUSION

There is inherent challenge in characterizing localization benefit for individuals with CI for SSD. Our data demonstrate the limitations of utilization of average error as the sole metric for outcome benefit. We emphasize the importance of continued research investigating alternative outcome measures as we work toward a more refined understanding of the potential benefits and limitations of cochlear implantation for SSD.

[Interaural stimulation timing mismatch in listeners provided with a cochlear implant and a hearing aid : A review focusing on quantification and compensation]

Bimodal provision of patients with asymmetric hearing loss with a hearing aid ipsilaterally and a cochlear implant (CI) contralaterally is probably the most complicated type of CI provision due to a variety of inherent variables. This review article presents all the systematic interaural mismatches between electric and acoustic stimulation that can occur in bimodal listeners. One of these mismatches is the interaural latency offset, i.e., the time difference of activation of the auditory nerve by acoustic and electric stimulation. Methods for quantifying this offset are presented by registering electrically and acoustically evoked potentials and measuring processing delays in the devices. Technical compensation of the interaural latency offset and its positive effect on sound localization ability in bimodal listeners is also described. Finally, most recent findings are discussed which may explain why compensation of the interaural latency offset does not improve speech understanding in noise in bimodal listeners.

Longitudinal auditory data of children with prelingual single-sided deafness managed with early cochlear implantation

Individuals with single-sided deafness (SSD) have no access to binaural hearing, which limits their ability to localize sounds and understand speech in noisy environments. In addition, children with prelingual SSD are at risk for neurocognitive and academic difficulties. Early cochlear implantation may lead to improved hearing outcomes by restoring bilateral hearing. However, its longitudinal impact on the development of children with SSD remains unclear. In the current study, a group of young children with prelingual SSD received a cochlear implant at an early age. From the age of four, the children’s spatial hearing skills could be assessed using a spatial speech perception in noise test and a sound localization test. The results are compared to those of two control groups: children with SSD without a cochlear implant and children with bilateral normal hearing. Overall, the implanted group exhibited improved speech perception in noise abilities and better sound localization skills, compared to their non-implanted peers. On average, the children wore their device approximately nine hours a day. Given the large contribution of maturation to the development of spatial hearing skills, further follow-up is important to understand the long-term benefit of a cochlear implant for children with prelingual SSD.

Sound Source Localization by Cochlear Implant Recipients with Normal Hearing in the Contralateral Ear: Effects of Spectral Content and Duration of Listening Experience

INTRODUCTION

Cochlear implant (CI) recipients with normal hearing (NH) in the contralateral ear experience a significant improvement in sound source localization when listening with the CI in combination with their NH-ear (CI + NH) as compared to with the NH-ear alone. The improvement in localization is primarily due to sensitivity to interaural level differences (ILDs). Sensitivity to interaural timing differences (ITDs) may be limited by auditory aging, frequency-to-place mismatches, the signal coding strategy, and duration of CI use. The present report assessed the sensitivity of ILD and ITD cues in CI + NH listeners who were recipients of long electrode arrays that provide minimal frequency-to-place mismatches and were mapped with a coding strategy that presents fine structure cues on apical channels.

METHODS

Sensitivity to ILDs and ITDs for localization was assessed using broadband noise (BBN), as well as high-pass (HP) and low-pass (LP) filtered noise for adult CI + NH listeners. Stimuli were 200-ms noise bursts presented from 11 speakers spaced evenly over an 180° arc. Performance was quantified in root-mean-squared error and response patterns were analyzed to evaluate the consistency, accuracy, and side bias of the responses. Fifteen listeners completed the task at the 2-year post-activation visit; seven listeners repeated the task at a later annual visit.

RESULTS

Performance at the 2-year visit was best with the BBN and HP stimuli and poorer with the LP stimulus. Responses to the BBN and HP stimuli were significantly correlated, consistent with the idea that CI + NH listeners primarily use ILD cues for localization. For the LP stimulus, some listeners responded consistently and accurately and with limited side bias, which may indicate sensitivity to ITD cues. Two of the 7 listeners who repeated the task at a later annual visit experienced a significant improvement in performance with the LP stimulus, which may indicate that sensitivity to ITD cues may improve with long-term CI use.

CONCLUSIONS

CI recipients with a NH-ear primarily use ILD cues for sound source localization, though some may use ITD cues as well. Sensitivity to ITD cues may improve with long-term CI listening experience.

No Benefit of Deriving Cochlear-Implant Maps From Binaural Temporal-Envelope Sensitivity for Speech Perception or Spatial Hearing Under Single-Sided Deafness

OBJECTIVES

This study tested whether speech perception and spatial acuity improved in people with single-sided deafness and a cochlear implant (SSD+CI) when the frequency allocation table (FAT) of the CI was adjusted to optimize frequency-dependent sensitivity to binaural disparities.

DESIGN

Nine SSD+CI listeners with at least 6 months of CI listening experience participated. Individual experimental FATs were created to best match the frequency-to-place mapping across ears using either sensitivity to binaural temporal-envelope disparities or estimated insertion depth. Spatial localization ability was measured, along with speech perception in spatially collocated or separated noise, first with the clinical FATs and then with the experimental FATs acutely and at 2-month intervals for 6 months. Listeners then returned to the clinical FATs and were retested acutely and after 1 month to control for long-term learning effects.

RESULTS

The experimental FAT varied between listeners, differing by an average of 0.15 octaves from the clinical FAT. No significant differences in performance were observed in any of the measures between the experimental FAT after 6 months and the clinical FAT one month later, and no clear relationship was found between the size of the frequency-allocation shift and perceptual changes.

CONCLUSION

Adjusting the FAT to optimize sensitivity to interaural temporal-envelope disparities did not improve localization or speech perception. The clinical frequency-to-place alignment may already be sufficient, given the inherently poor spectral resolution of CIs. Alternatively, other factors, such as temporal misalignment between the two ears, may need to be addressed before any benefits of spectral alignment can be observed.

Frequency Fitting Optimization Using Evolutionary Algorithm in Cochlear Implant Users with Bimodal Binaural Hearing

Optimizing hearing in patients with a unilateral cochlear implant (CI) and contralateral acoustic hearing is a challenge. Evolutionary algorithms (EA) can explore a large set of potential solutions in a stochastic manner to approach the optimum of a minimization problem. The objective of this study was to develop and evaluate an EA-based protocol to modify the default frequency settings of a MAP (fMAP) of the CI in patients with bimodal hearing. Methods: This monocentric prospective study included 27 adult CI users (with post-lingual deafness and contralateral functional hearing). A fitting program based on EA was developed to approach the best fMAP. Generated fMAPs were tested by speech recognition (word recognition score, WRS) in noise and free-field-like conditions. By combining these first fMAPs and adding some random changes, a total of 13 fMAPs over 3 generations were produced. Participants were evaluated before and 45 to 60 days after the fitting by WRS in noise and questionnaires on global sound quality and music perception in bimodal binaural conditions. Results: WRS in noise improved with the EA-based fitting in comparison to the default fMAP (41.67 ± 9.70% versus 64.63 ± 16.34%, respectively, p = 0.0001, signed-rank test). The global sound quality and music perception were also improved, as judged by ratings on questionnaires and scales. Finally, most patients chose to keep the new fitting definitively. Conclusions: By modifying the default fMAPs, the EA improved the speech discrimination in noise and the sound quality in bimodal binaural conditions.

Considerations for Fitting Cochlear Implants Bimodally and to the Single-Sided Deaf

When listening with a cochlear implant through one ear and acoustically through the other, binaural benefits and spatial hearing abilities are generally poorer than in other bilaterally stimulated configurations. With the working hypothesis that binaural neurons require interaurally matched inputs, we review causes for mismatch, their perceptual consequences, and experimental methods for mismatch measurements. The focus is on the three primary interaural dimensions of latency, frequency, and level. Often, the mismatch is not constant, but rather highly stimulus-dependent. We report on mismatch compensation strategies, taking into consideration the specific needs of the respective patient groups. Practical challenges typically faced by audiologists in the proposed fitting procedure are discussed. While improvement in certain areas (e.g., speaker localization) is definitely achievable, a more comprehensive mismatch compensation is a very ambitious endeavor. Even in the hypothetical ideal fitting case, performance is not expected to exceed that of a good bilateral cochlear implant user.

Interaural Place-of-Stimulation Mismatch Estimates Using CT Scans and Binaural Perception, But Not Pitch, Are Consistent in Cochlear-Implant Users

Bilateral cochlear implants (BI-CIs) or a CI for single-sided deafness (SSD-CI; one normally functioning acoustic ear) can partially restore spatial-hearing abilities, including sound localization and speech understanding in noise. For these populations, however, interaural place-of-stimulation mismatch can occur and thus diminish binaural sensitivity that relies on interaurally frequency-matched neurons. This study examined whether plasticity-reorganization of central neural pathways over time-can compensate for peripheral interaural place mismatch. We hypothesized differential plasticity across two systems: none for binaural processing but adaptation for pitch perception toward frequencies delivered by the specific electrodes. Interaural place mismatch was evaluated in 19 BI-CI and 23 SSD-CI human subjects (both sexes) using binaural processing (interaural-time-difference discrimination with simultaneous bilateral stimulation), pitch perception (pitch ranking for single electrodes or acoustic tones with sequential bilateral stimulation), and physical electrode-location estimates from computed-tomography (CT) scans. On average, CT scans revealed relatively little BI-CI interaural place mismatch (26° insertion-angle mismatch) but a relatively large SSD-CI mismatch, particularly at low frequencies (166° for an electrode tuned to 300 Hz, decreasing to 14° at 7000 Hz). For BI-CI subjects, the three metrics were in agreement because there was little mismatch. For SSD-CI subjects, binaural and CT measurements were in agreement, suggesting little binaural-system plasticity induced by mismatch. The pitch measurements disagreed with binaural and CT measurements, suggesting place-pitch plasticity or a procedural bias. These results suggest that reducing interaural place mismatch and potentially improving binaural processing by reprogramming the CI frequency allocation would be better done using CT-scan than pitch information.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Electrode-array placement for cochlear implants (bionic prostheses that partially restore hearing) does not explicitly align neural representations of frequency information. The resulting interaural place-of-stimulation mismatch can diminish spatial-hearing abilities. In this study, adults with two cochlear implants showed reasonable interaural alignment, whereas those with one cochlear implant but normal hearing in the other ear often showed mismatch. In cases of mismatch, binaural sensitivity was best when the same cochlear locations were stimulated in both ears, suggesting that binaural brainstem pathways do not experience plasticity to compensate for mismatch. In contrast, interaurally pitch-matched electrodes deviated from cochlear-location estimates and did not optimize binaural sensitivity. Clinical correction of interaural place mismatch using binaural or computed-tomography (but not pitch) information may improve spatial-hearing benefits.

Effects of Spectral Resolution and Frequency Mismatch on Speech Understanding and Spatial Release From Masking in Simulated Bilateral Cochlear Implants

OBJECTIVES

Due to interaural frequency mismatch, bilateral cochlear-implant (CI) users may be less able to take advantage of binaural cues that normal-hearing (NH) listeners use for spatial hearing, such as interaural time differences and interaural level differences. As such, bilateral CI users have difficulty segregating competing speech even when the target and competing talkers are spatially separated. The goal of this study was to evaluate the effects of spectral resolution, tonotopic mismatch (the frequency mismatch between the acoustic center frequency assigned to CI electrode within an implanted ear relative to the expected spiral ganglion characteristic frequency), and interaural mismatch (differences in the degree of tonotopic mismatch in each ear) on speech understanding and spatial release from masking (SRM) in the presence of competing talkers in NH subjects listening to bilateral vocoder simulations.

DESIGN

During testing, both target and masker speech were presented in five-word sentences that had the same syntax but were not necessarily meaningful. The sentences were composed of five categories in fixed order (Name, Verb, Number, Color, and Clothes), each of which had 10 items, such that multiple sentences could be generated by randomly selecting a word from each category. Speech reception thresholds (SRTs) for the target sentence presented in competing speech maskers were measured. The target speech was delivered to both ears and the two speech maskers were delivered to (1) both ears (diotic masker), or (2) different ears (dichotic masker: one delivered to the left ear and the other delivered to the right ear). Stimuli included the unprocessed speech and four 16-channel sine-vocoder simulations with different interaural mismatch (0, 1, and 2 mm). SRM was calculated as the difference between the diotic and dichotic listening conditions.

RESULTS

With unprocessed speech, SRTs were 0.3 and -18.0 dB for the diotic and dichotic maskers, respectively. For the spectrally degraded speech with mild tonotopic mismatch and no interaural mismatch, SRTs were 5.6 and -2.0 dB for the diotic and dichotic maskers, respectively. When the tonotopic mismatch increased in both ears, SRTs worsened to 8.9 and 2.4 dB for the diotic and dichotic maskers, respectively. When the two ears had different tonotopic mismatch (e.g., there was interaural mismatch), the performance drop in SRTs was much larger for the dichotic than for the diotic masker. The largest SRM was observed with unprocessed speech (18.3 dB). With the CI simulations, SRM was significantly reduced to 7.6 dB even with mild tonotopic mismatch but no interaural mismatch; SRM was further reduced with increasing interaural mismatch.

CONCLUSIONS

The results demonstrate that frequency resolution, tonotopic mismatch, and interaural mismatch have differential effects on speech understanding and SRM in simulation of bilateral CIs. Minimizing interaural mismatch may be critical to optimize binaural benefits and improve CI performance for competing speech, a typical listening environment. SRM (the difference in SRTs between diotic and dichotic maskers) may be a useful clinical tool to assess interaural frequency mismatch in bilateral CI users and to evaluate the benefits of optimization methods that minimize interaural mismatch.

A Comparison of Place-Pitch-Based Interaural Electrode Matching Methods for Bilateral Cochlear-Implant Users

Interaural place-of-stimulation mismatch for bilateral cochlear-implant (BI-CI) listeners is often evaluated using pitch-comparison tasks that can be susceptible to procedural biases. Bias effects were compared for three sequential interaural pitch-comparison tasks in six BI-CI listeners using single-electrode direct stimulation. The reference (right ear) was a single basal, middle, or apical electrode. The comparison electrode (left ear) was chosen from one of three ranges: basal half, full array, or apical half. In Experiment 1 (discrimination), interaural pairs were chosen randomly (method of constant stimuli). In Experiment 2 (ranking), an efficient adaptive procedure rank ordered 3 reference and 6 or 11 comparison electrodes. In Experiment 3 (matching), listeners adjusted the comparison electrode to pitch match the reference. Each experiment was evaluated for testing-range bias (point of subjective equality [PSE] vs. comparison-range midpoint) and reference-electrode slope bias (PSE vs. reference electrode). Discrimination showed large biases for both metrics; matching showed a smaller but significant reference-electrode bias; ranking showed no significant biases in either dimension. Ranking and matching were also evaluated for starting-point bias (PSE vs. adaptive-track starting point), but neither showed significant effects. A response-distribution truncation model explained a nonsignificant bias for ranking but it could not fully explain the observed biases for discrimination or matching. It is concluded that (a) BI-CI interaural pitch comparisons are inconsistent across test methods; (b) biases must be evaluated in more than one dimension before accepting the results as valid; and (c) of the three methods tested, ranking was least susceptible to biases and therefore emerged as the optimal approach.

Development of cortical auditory responses to speech in noise in unilaterally deaf adults following cochlear implantation

BACKGROUND

For patients with single-sided deafness (SSD), restoration of binaural function via cochlear implant (CI) has been shown to improve speech understanding in noise. The objective of this study was to investigate changes in behavioral performance and cortical auditory responses following cochlear implantation.

DESIGN

Prospective longitudinal study.

SETTING

Tertiary referral center.

METHODS

Six adults with SSD were tested before and 12 months post-activation of the CI. Six normal hearing (NH) participants served as experimental controls. Speech understanding in noise was evaluated for various spatial conditions. Cortical auditory evoked potentials were recorded with /ba/ stimuli in quiet and in noise. Global field power and responses at Cz were analyzed.

RESULTS

Speech understanding in noise significantly improved with the CI when speech was presented to the CI ear and noise to the normal ear (p<0.05), but remained poorer than that of NH controls (p<0.05). N1 peak amplitude measure in noise significantly increased after CI activation (p<0.05), but remained lower than that of NH controls (p<0.05) at 12 months. After 12 months of CI experience, cortical responses in noise became more comparable between groups.

CONCLUSION

Binaural restoration in SSD patients via cochlear implantation improved speech performance noise and cortical responses. While behavioral performance and cortical auditory responses improved, SSD-CI outcomes remained poorer than that of NH controls in most cases, suggesting only partial restoration of binaural hearing.

Sensitivity to binaural temporal-envelope beats with single-sided deafness and a cochlear implant as a measure of tonotopic match (L)

For cochlear-implant users with near-normal contralateral hearing, a mismatch between the frequency-to-place mapping in the two ears could produce a suboptimal performance. This study assesses tonotopic matches via binaural interactions. Dynamic interaural time-difference sensitivity was measured using bandpass-filtered pulse trains at different rates in the acoustic and implanted ear, creating binaural envelope beats. Sensitivity to beats should peak when the same tonotopic region is stimulated in both ears. All nine participants detected dynamic interaural timing differences and demonstrated some frequency selectivity. This method provides a guide to frequency-to-place mapping without compensation for inherent latency differences between the acoustic and implanted ears.

Mechanisms of Localization and Speech Perception with Colocated and Spatially Separated Noise and Speech Maskers Under Single-Sided Deafness with a Cochlear Implant

OBJECTIVES

This study tested listeners with a cochlear implant (CI) in one ear and acoustic hearing in the other ear, to assess their ability to localize sound and to understand speech in collocated or spatially separated noise or speech maskers.

DESIGN

Eight CI listeners with contralateral acoustic hearing ranging from normal hearing to moderate sensorineural hearing loss were tested. Localization accuracy was measured in five of the listeners using stimuli that emphasized the separate contributions of interaural level differences (ILDs) and interaural time differences (ITD) in the temporal envelope and/or fine structure. Sentence recognition was tested in all eight CI listeners, using collocated and spatially separated speech-shaped Gaussian noise and two-talker babble. Performance was compared with that of age-matched normal-hearing listeners via loudspeakers or via headphones with vocoder simulations of CI processing.

RESULTS

Localization improved with the CI but only when high-frequency ILDs were available. Listeners experienced no additional benefit via ITDs in the stimulus envelope or fine structure using real or vocoder-simulated CIs. Speech recognition in two-talker babble improved with a CI in seven of the eight listeners when the target was located at the front and the babble was presented on the side of the acoustic-hearing ear, but otherwise showed little or no benefit of a CI.

CONCLUSION

Sound localization can be improved with a CI in cases of significant residual hearing in the contralateral ear, but only for sounds with high-frequency content, and only based on ILDs. In speech understanding, the CI contributed most when it was in the ear with the better signal to noise ratio with a speech masker.

Hearing with One Ear: Consequences and Treatments for Profound Unilateral Hearing Loss

There is an increasing global recognition of the negative impact of hearing loss, and its association to many chronic health conditions. The deficits and disabilities associated with profound unilateral hearing loss, however, continue to be under-recognized and lack public awareness. Profound unilateral hearing loss significantly impairs spatial hearing abilities, which is reliant on the complex interaction of monaural and binaural hearing cues. Unilaterally deafened listeners lose access to critical binaural hearing cues. Consequently, this leads to a reduced ability to understand speech in competing noise and to localize sounds. The functional deficits of profound unilateral hearing loss have a substantial impact on socialization, learning and work productivity. In recognition of this, rehabilitative solutions such as the rerouting of signal and hearing implants are on the rise. This review focuses on the latest insights into the deficits of profound unilateral hearing impairment, and current treatment approaches.

Spatial Speech-in-Noise Performance in Bimodal and Single-Sided Deaf Cochlear Implant Users

This study compared spatial speech-in-noise performance in two cochlear implant (CI) patient groups: bimodal listeners, who use a hearing aid contralaterally to support their impaired acoustic hearing, and listeners with contralateral normal hearing, i.e., who were single-sided deaf before implantation. Using a laboratory setting that controls for head movements and that simulates spatial acoustic scenes, speech reception thresholds were measured for frontal speech-in-stationary noise from the front, the left, or the right side. Spatial release from masking (SRM) was then extracted from speech reception thresholds for monaural and binaural listening. SRM was found to be significantly lower in bimodal CI than in CI single-sided deaf listeners. Within each listener group, the SRM extracted from monaural listening did not differ from the SRM extracted from binaural listening. In contrast, a normal-hearing control group showed a significant improvement in SRM when using two ears in comparison to one. Neither CI group showed a binaural summation effect; that is, their performance was not improved by using two devices instead of the best monaural device in each spatial scenario. The results confirm a "listening with the better ear" strategy in the two CI patient groups, where patients benefited from using two ears/devices instead of one by selectively attending to the better one. Which one is the better ear, however, depends on the spatial scenario and on the individual configuration of hearing loss.

Counting or discriminating the number of voices to assess binaural fusion with single-sided vocoders

For single-sided deafness cochlear-implant (SSD-CI) listeners, different peripheral representations for electric versus acoustic stimulation, combined with interaural frequency mismatch, might limit the ability to perceive bilaterally presented speech as a single voice. The assessment of binaural fusion often relies on subjective report, which requires listeners to have some understanding of the perceptual phenomenon of object formation. Two experiments explored whether binaural fusion could instead be assessed using judgments of the number of voices in a mixture. In an SSD-CI simulation, normal-hearing listeners were presented with one or two "diotic" voices (i.e., unprocessed in one ear and noise-vocoded in the other) in a mixture with additional monaural voices. In experiment 1, listeners reported how many voices they heard. Listeners generally counted the diotic speech as two separate voices, regardless of interaural frequency mismatch. In experiment 2, listeners identified which of two mixtures contained diotic speech. Listeners performed significantly better with interaurally frequency-matched than with frequency-mismatched stimuli. These contrasting results suggest that listeners experienced partial fusion: not enough to count the diotic speech as one voice, but enough to detect its presence. The diotic-speech detection task (experiment 2) might provide a tool to evaluate fusion and optimize frequency mapping for SSD-CI patients.

Reducing the Device Delay Mismatch Can Improve Sound Localization in Bimodal Cochlear Implant/Hearing-Aid Users

In users of a cochlear implant (CI) together with a contralateral hearing aid (HA), so-called bimodal listeners, differences in processing latencies between digital HA and CI up to 9 ms constantly superimpose interaural time differences. In the present study, the effect of this device delay mismatch on sound localization accuracy was investigated. For this purpose, localization accuracy in the frontal horizontal plane was measured with the original and minimized device delay mismatch. The reduction was achieved by delaying the CI stimulation according to the delay of the individually worn HA. For this, a portable, programmable, battery-powered delay line based on a ring buffer running on a microcontroller was designed and assembled. After an acclimatization period to the delayed CI stimulation of 1 hr, the nine bimodal study participants showed a highly significant improvement in localization accuracy of 11.6% compared with the everyday situation without the delay line ( p < .01). Concluding, delaying CI stimulation to minimize the device delay mismatch seems to be a promising method to increase sound localization accuracy in bimodal listeners.