Computed-Tomography Estimates of Interaural Mismatch in Insertion Depth and Scalar Location in Bilateral Cochlear-Implant Users

Cochlear-implant dichotic listening performance and effort are disrupted with functional ear asymmetry

When speech understanding abilities differ across the ears, auditory attention and listening effort could be impacted. Twenty listeners with bilateral cochlear implants (CIs) completed this experiment. Fourteen listeners had symmetric and six listeners had asymmetric functional hearing. Listeners completed monotic and dichotic digit recall with digit string lengths of four and six digits and attention directed to each ear. Pupil size was monitored as an index of listening effort. Individual differences in working memory and inhibition abilities were measured. It was hypothesized that ear asymmetry would lead to poorer listening performance and higher listening effort, and that cognitive abilities would predict both performance and listening effort. Greater differences in performance across ears were observed with asymmetry. Lower listening effort was observed with asymmetry, regardless of which ear was attended. Poorer working memory abilities predicted higher listening effort. These results suggest that asymmetric listeners may experience reduced perception of a poorer ear, and that individuals with poorer working memory abilities are at risk to experience higher listening effort in complex listening environments with CIs. More broadly, these results suggest that the salience of sensory inputs contributes to auditory attention ability and use of cognitive resources.

Binaural fusion: Complexities in definition and measurement

Despite the growing interest in studying binaural fusion, there is little consensus over its definition or how it is best measured. This review seeks to describe the complexities of binaural fusion, highlight measurement challenges, provide guidelines for rigorous perceptual measurements, and provide a working definition that encompasses this information. First, it is argued that binaural fusion may be multidimensional and might occur in one domain but not others, such as fusion in the spatial but not the spectral domain or vice versa. Second, binaural fusion may occur on a continuous scale rather than on a binary one. Third, binaural fusion responses are highly idiosyncratic, which could be a result of methodology, such as the specific experimental instructions, suggesting a need to explicitly report the instructions given. Fourth, it is possible that direct ("Did you hear one sound or two?") and indirect ("Where did the sound come from?" or "What was the pitch of the sound?") measurements of fusion will produce different results. In conclusion, explicit consideration of these attributes and reporting of methodology are needed for rigorous interpretation and comparison across studies and listener populations.

Review of Binaural Processing With Asymmetrical Hearing Outcomes in Patients With Bilateral Cochlear Implants

Bilateral cochlear implants (BiCIs) result in several benefits, including improvements in speech understanding in noise and sound source localization. However, the benefit bilateral implants provide among recipients varies considerably across individuals. Here we consider one of the reasons for this variability: difference in hearing function between the two ears, that is, interaural asymmetry. Thus far, investigations of interaural asymmetry have been highly specialized within various research areas. The goal of this review is to integrate these studies in one place, motivating future research in the area of interaural asymmetry. We first consider bottom-up processing, where binaural cues are represented using excitation-inhibition of signals from the left ear and right ear, varying with the location of the sound in space, and represented by the lateral superior olive in the auditory brainstem. We then consider top-down processing via predictive coding, which assumes that perception stems from expectations based on context and prior sensory experience, represented by cascading series of cortical circuits. An internal, perceptual model is maintained and updated in light of incoming sensory input. Together, we hope that this amalgamation of physiological, behavioral, and modeling studies will help bridge gaps in the field of binaural hearing and promote a clearer understanding of the implications of interaural asymmetry for future research on optimal patient interventions.

Effect of experimentally introduced interaural frequency mismatch on sentence recognition in bilateral cochlear-implant listeners

Bilateral cochlear-implant users experience interaural frequency mismatch because of asymmetries in array insertion and frequency-to-electrode assignment. To explore the acute perceptual consequences of such mismatch, sentence recognition in quiet was measured in nine bilateral cochlear-implant listeners as frequency allocations in the poorer ear were shifted by ±1.5, ±3, and ±4.5 mm using experimental programs. Shifts in frequency allocation >3 mm reduced bilateral sentence scores below those for the better ear alone, suggesting that the poorer ear interfered with better-ear perception. This was not a result of fewer active channels; deactivating electrodes without frequency shifting had minimal effect.

Lateralization of interaural time differences with mixed rates of stimulation in bilateral cochlear implant listeners

While listeners with bilateral cochlear implants (BiCIs) are able to access information in both ears, they still struggle to perform well on spatial hearing tasks when compared to normal hearing listeners. This performance gap could be attributed to the high stimulation rates used for speech representation in clinical processors. Prior work has shown that spatial cues, such as interaural time differences (ITDs), are best conveyed at low rates. Further, BiCI listeners are sensitive to ITDs with a mixture of high and low rates. However, it remains unclear whether mixed-rate stimuli are perceived as unitary percepts and spatially mapped to intracranial locations. Here, electrical pulse trains were presented on five, interaurally pitch-matched electrode pairs using research processors, at either uniformly high rates, low rates, or mixed rates. Eight post-lingually deafened adults were tested on perceived intracranial lateralization of ITDs ranging from 50 to 1600 μs. Extent of lateralization depended on the location of low-rate stimulation along the electrode array: greatest in the low- and mixed-rate configurations, and smallest in the high-rate configuration. All but one listener perceived a unitary auditory object. These findings suggest that a mixed-rate processing strategy can result in good lateralization and convey a unitary auditory object with ITDs.

Effect of experimentally introduced interaural frequency mismatch on sentence recognition in bilateral cochlear-implant listeners

Bilateral cochlear-implant users experience interaural frequency mismatch because of asymmetries in array insertion and frequency-to-electrode assignment. To explore the acute perceptual consequences of such mismatch, sentence recognition in quiet was measured in nine bilateral cochlear-implant listeners as frequency allocations in the poorer ear were shifted by ±1.5, ±3 and ±4.5 mm using experimental programs. Shifts in frequency allocation >3 mm were found to reduce bilateral sentence scores below those for the better ear alone, suggesting that the poorer ear interfered with better-ear perception. This was not a result of fewer active channels; deactivating electrodes without frequency shifting had minimal effect.

Interaural asymmetry of dynamic range: Abnormal fusion, bilateral interference, and shifts in attention

Speech information in the better ear interferes with the poorer ear in patients with bilateral cochlear implants (BiCIs) who have large asymmetries in speech intelligibility between ears. The goal of the present study was to assess how each ear impacts, and whether one dominates, speech perception using simulated CI processing in older and younger normal-hearing (ONH and YNH) listeners. Dynamic range (DR) was manipulated symmetrically or asymmetrically across spectral bands in a vocoder. We hypothesized that if abnormal integration of speech information occurs with asymmetrical speech understanding, listeners would demonstrate an atypical preference in accuracy when reporting speech presented to the better ear and fusion of speech between the ears (i.e., an increased number of one-word responses when two words were presented). Results from three speech conditions showed that: (1) When the same word was presented to both ears, speech identification accuracy decreased if one or both ears decreased in DR, but listeners usually reported hearing one word. (2) When two words with different vowels were presented to both ears, speech identification accuracy and percentage of two-word responses decreased consistently as DR decreased in one or both ears. (3) When two rhyming words (e.g., bed and led) previously shown to phonologically fuse between ears (e.g., bled) were presented, listeners instead demonstrated interference as DR decreased. The word responded in (2) and (3) came from the right (symmetric) or better (asymmetric) ear, especially in (3) and for ONH listeners in (2). These results suggest that the ear with poorer dynamic range is downweighted by the auditory system, resulting in abnormal fusion and interference, especially for older listeners.

Asymmetric temporal envelope sensitivity: Within- and across-ear envelope comparisons in listeners with bilateral cochlear implants

For listeners with bilateral cochlear implants (BiCIs), patient-specific differences in the interface between cochlear implant (CI) electrodes and the auditory nerve can lead to degraded temporal envelope information, compromising the ability to distinguish between targets of interest and background noise. It is unclear how comparisons of degraded temporal envelope information across spectral channels (i.e., electrodes) affect the ability to detect differences in the temporal envelope, specifically amplitude modulation (AM) rate. In this study, two pulse trains were presented simultaneously via pairs of electrodes in different places of stimulation, within and/or across ears, with identical or differing AM rates. Results from 11 adults with BiCIs indicated that sensitivity to differences in AM rate was greatest when stimuli were paired between different places of stimulation in the same ear. Sensitivity from pairs of electrodes was predicted by the poorer electrode in the pair or the difference in fidelity between both electrodes in the pair. These findings suggest that electrodes yielding poorer temporal fidelity act as a bottleneck to comparisons of temporal information across frequency and ears, limiting access to the cues used to segregate sounds, which has important implications for device programming and optimizing patient outcomes with CIs.

The Relationship Between Interaural Insertion-Depth Differences, Scalar Location, and Interaural Time-Difference Processing in Adult Bilateral Cochlear-Implant Listeners

Sensitivity to interaural time differences (ITDs) in acoustic hearing involves comparison of interaurally frequency-matched inputs. Bilateral cochlear-implant arrays are, however, only approximately aligned in angular insertion depth and scalar location across the cochleae. Interaural place-of-stimulation mismatch therefore has the potential to impact binaural perception. ITD left-right discrimination thresholds were examined in 23 postlingually-deafened adult bilateral cochlear-implant listeners, using low-rate constant-amplitude pulse trains presented via direct stimulation to single electrodes in each ear. Angular insertion depth and scalar location measured from computed-tomography (CT) scans were used to quantify interaural mismatch, and their association with binaural performance was assessed. Number-matched electrodes displayed a median interaural insertion-depth mismatch of 18° and generally yielded best or near-best ITD discrimination thresholds. Two listeners whose discrimination thresholds did not show this pattern were confirmed via CT to have atypical array placement. Listeners with more number-matched electrode pairs located in the scala tympani displayed better thresholds than listeners with fewer such pairs. ITD tuning curves as a function of interaural electrode separation were broad; bandwidths at twice the threshold minimum averaged 10.5 electrodes (equivalent to 5.9 mm for a Cochlear-brand pre-curved array). Larger angular insertion-depth differences were associated with wider bandwidths. Wide ITD tuning curve bandwidths appear to be a product of both monopolar stimulation and angular insertion-depth mismatch. Cases of good ITD sensitivity with very wide bandwidths suggest that precise matching of insertion depth is not critical for discrimination thresholds. Further prioritizing scala tympani location at implantation should, however, benefit ITD sensitivity.

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.