Dataset Information

Long-term asymmetric hearing affects cochlear implantation outcomes differently in adults with pre- and postlingual hearing loss.

ABSTRACT: In many countries, a single cochlear implant is offered as a treatment for a bilateral hearing loss. In cases where there is asymmetry in the amount of sound deprivation between the ears, there is a dilemma in choosing which ear should be implanted. In many clinics, the choice of ear has been guided by an assumption that the reorganisation of the auditory pathways caused by longer duration of deafness in one ear is associated with poorer implantation outcomes for that ear. This assumption, however, is mainly derived from studies of early childhood deafness. This study compared outcomes following implantation of the better or poorer ear in cases of long-term hearing asymmetries. Audiological records of 146 adults with bilateral hearing loss using a single hearing aid were reviewed. The unaided ear had 15 to 72 years of unaided severe to profound hearing loss before unilateral cochlear implantation. 98 received the implant in their long-term sound-deprived ear. A multiple regression analysis was conducted to assess the relative contribution of potential predictors to speech recognition performance after implantation. Duration of bilateral significant hearing loss and the presence of a prelingual hearing loss explained the majority of variance in speech recognition performance following cochlear implantation. For participants with postlingual hearing loss, similar outcomes were obtained by implanting either ear. With prelingual hearing loss, poorer outcomes were obtained when implanting the long-term sound-deprived ear, but the duration of the sound deprivation in the implanted ear did not reliably predict outcomes. Contrary to an apparent clinical consensus, duration of sound deprivation in one ear has limited value in predicting speech recognition outcomes of cochlear implantation in that ear. Outcomes of cochlear implantation are more closely related to the period of time for which the brain is deprived of auditory stimulation from both ears.

SUBMITTER: Boisvert I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4456415 | biostudies-literature | 2015

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background:Single-sided deafness (SSD) and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL) have recently been proposed as a new indication for cochlear implantation. There is still no recommended treatment for these hearing deficits, and most options considered rely on the transfer of sound from the poor ear to the better ear, using Contralateral Routing of the Signal (CROS) hearing aids or bone conduction (BC) devices. In contrast, cochlear implantation allows the poor ear to be stimulated and binaural hearing abilities to be partially restored. Indeed, most recently published studies have reported an improvement in the spatial localisation of an incoming sound and better speech recognition in noisy environments after cochlear implantation in SSD/AHL subjects. It also provides consistent relief of tinnitus when associated. These encouraging hearing outcomes raise the question of the cost-utility of this expensive treatment in an extended indication. Methods:The final endpoint of this national multicentre study is to determine the incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of cochlear implantation in comparison to the current standard of care in France through simple observation, using a randomised controlled trial. Firstly, the study comprises a prospective and descriptive part, where 150 SSD/AHL subjects try CROS hearing aids and a BC device for three weeks each. Secondly, the choice is made between CROS hearing aids, BC implanted device and cochlear implantation. Hearing outcomes and quality of life measurements are described after 6?months for the subjects who chose CROS, BC or declined any option. The subjects who opt for cochlear implantation are randomised between one group where the cochlear implant is inserted without delay and one group of simple initial observation. Hearing outcomes and quality of life measurements are compared after 6?months. Discussion:The present study was designed to assess the efficiency of cochlear implantation in SSD/AHL. A favourable cost-utility ratio in this extended indication would strengthen the promising clinical results and justify a reimbursement by the health insurance. The efficiency of other options (CROS, BC) will also be described. Trial registration:This research has been registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/), the 29th July 2014 under the n°NCT02204618.

Project description:BackgroundThe spiral ganglion hypothesis suggests that pathogenic variants in genes preferentially expressed in the spiral ganglion nerves (SGN), may lead to poor cochlear implant (CI) performance. It was long thought that TMPRSS3 was particularly expressed in the SGNs. However, this is not in line with recent reviews evaluating CI performance in subjects with TMPRSS3-associated sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) reporting overall beneficial outcomes. These outcomes are, however, based on variable follow-up times of, in general, 1 year or less. Therefore, we aimed to 1. evaluate long-term outcomes after CI implantation of speech recognition in quiet in subjects with TMPRSS3-associated SNHL, and 2. test the spiral ganglion hypothesis using the TMPRSS3-group.MethodsThis retrospective, multicentre study evaluated long-term CI performance in a Dutch population with TMPRSS3-associated SNHL. The phoneme scores at 70 dB with CI in the TMPRSS3-group were compared to a control group of fully genotyped cochlear implant users with post-lingual SNHL without genes affecting the SGN, or severe anatomical inner ear malformations. CI-recipients with a phoneme score ≤ 70% at least 1-year post-implantation were considered poor performers and were evaluated in more detail.ResultsThe TMPRSS3 group consisted of 29 subjects (N = 33 ears), and the control group of 62 subjects (N = 67 ears). For the TMPRSS3-group, we found an average phoneme score of 89% after 5 years, which remained stable up to 10 years post-implantation. At both 5 and 10-year follow-up, no difference was found in speech recognition in quiet between both groups (p = 0.830 and p = 0.987, respectively). Despite these overall adequate CI outcomes, six CI recipients had a phoneme score of ≤ 70% and were considered poor performers. The latter was observed in subjects with residual hearing post-implantation or older age at implantation.ConclusionSubjects with TMPRSS3-associated SNHL have adequate and stable long-term outcomes after cochlear implantation, equal to the performance of genotyped patient with affected genes not expressed in the SGN. These findings are not in line with the spiral ganglion hypothesis. However, more recent studies showed that TMPRSS3 is mainly expressed in the hair cells with only limited SGN expression. Therefore, we cannot confirm nor refute the spiral ganglion hypothesis.

Project description:The use of neonatal hearing screening has enabled the identification of congenital unilateral sensorineural hearing loss (USNHL) immediately after birth, and today there are several intervention options available to minimize potential adverse effects of this disease, including cochlear implantation. This study aims to analyze the characteristics of the inner ear of a homogeneous group of congenital non-syndromic USNHL to highlight the features of the inner ear, which can help in clinical, surgical, and rehabilitative decision-making. A retrospective chart review was carried out at a tertiary referral center. Systematic diagnostic work-up and rigorous inclusion-exclusion criteria were applied to 126 children with unilateral hearing impairment, leading to a selection of 39 strictly congenital and non-syndromic USNHL cases, undergoing computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging studies. The frequency and type of malformations of the inner ear in USNHL and unaffected contralateral ears were assessed, with an in-depth analysis of the deficiency of the cochlear nerve (CND), the internal auditory canal (IAC) and the cochlear aperture (CA). Inner ear anomalies were found in 18 out of 39 (46%) of the USNHL patients. In 1 subject, the anomalies were bilateral, and the CND resulted in the predominant identified defect (78% of our abnormal case series), frequently associated with CA stenosis. Only 3 out of 14 children with CND presented stenosis of the IAC. CND and CA stenosis (and to a much lesser extent IAC stenosis) are a frequent association within congenital and non-syndromic USNHL that could represent a distinct pathological entity affecting otherwise healthy infants. In the context of a diagnostic work-up, the evaluation with CT and MRI measurements should take place in a shared decision-making setting with thorough counseling. Both imaging techniques have proven useful in differentiating the cases that will most likely benefit from the cochlear implant, from those with potentially poor implant performance.

Project description:IntroductionCochlear implantation is a recent approach proposed to treat single-sided deafness (SSD) and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL). Several cohort studies showed its effectiveness on tinnitus and variable results on binaural hearing. The main objective of this study is to assess the outcomes of cochlear implantation and other treatment options in SSD/AHL on quality of life.MethodsThis prospective multicenter study was conducted in 7 tertiary university hospitals and included an observational cohort study of SSD/AHL adult patients treated using contralateral routing of the signal (CROS) hearing aids or bone-anchored hearing systems (BAHSs) or who declined all treatments, and a randomized controlled trial in subjects treated by cochlear implantation, after failure of CROS and BAHS trials. In total, 155 subjects with SSD or AHL, with or without associated tinnitus, were enrolled. After 2 consecutive trials with CROS hearing aids and BAHSs on headband, all subjects chose any of the 4 treatment options (abstention, CROS, BAHS, or cochlear implant [CI]). The subjects who opted for a CI were randomized between 2 arms (CI vs. initial observation). Six months after the treatment choice, quality of life was assessed using both generic (EuroQoL-5D, EQ-5D) and auditory-specific quality-of-life indices (Nijmegen Cochlear implant Questionnaire [NCIQ] and Visual Analogue Scale [VAS] for tinnitus severity). Performances for speech-in-noise recognition and localization were measured as secondary outcomes.ResultsCROS was chosen by 75 subjects, while 51 opted for cochlear implantation, 18 for BAHSs, and 11 for abstention. Six months after treatment, both EQ-5D VAS and auditory-specific quality-of-life indices were significantly better in the "CI" arm versus "observation" arm. The mean effect of the CI was particularly significant in subjects with associated severe tinnitus (mean improvement of 20.7 points ± 19.7 on EQ-5D VAS, 20.4 ± 12.4 on NCIQ, and 51.4 ± 35.4 on tinnitus). No significant effect of the CI was found on binaural hearing results. Before/after comparisons showed that the CROS and BAHS also improved significantly NCIQ scores (for CROS: +7.7, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] = [4.5; 10.8]; for the BAHS: +14.3, 95% CI = [7.9; 20.7]).ConclusionCochlear implantation leads to significant improvements in quality of life in SSD and AHL patients, particularly in subjects with associated severe tinnitus, who are thereby the best candidates to an extension of CI indications.

Project description:Hybrid or electro-acoustic stimulation (EAS) cochlear implants (CIs) are designed to provide high-frequency electric hearing together with residual low-frequency acoustic hearing. However, 30-50% of EAS CI recipients lose residual hearing after implantation. The objective of this study was to determine the mechanisms of EAS-induced hearing loss in an animal model with high-frequency hearing loss. Guinea pigs were exposed to 24 h of noise (12-24 kHz at 116 dB) to induce a high-frequency hearing loss. After recovery, two groups of animals were implanted (n = 6 per group), with one group receiving chronic acoustic and electric stimulation for 10 weeks, and the other group receiving no stimulation during this time frame. A third group (n = 6) was not implanted, but received chronic acoustic stimulation. Auditory brainstem responses were recorded biweekly to monitor changes in hearing. The organ of Corti was immunolabeled with phalloidin, anti-CtBP2, and anti-GluR2 to quantify hair cells, ribbons and post-synaptic receptors. The lateral wall was immunolabeled with phalloidin and lectin to quantify stria vascularis capillary diameters. Bimodal or trimodal diameter distributions were observed; the number and location of peaks were objectively determined using the Aikake Information Criterion and Expectation Maximization algorithm. Noise exposure led to immediate hearing loss at 16-32 kHz for all groups. Cochlear implantation led to additional hearing loss at 4-8 kHz; this hearing loss was negatively and positively correlated with minimum and maximum peaks of the bimodal or trimodal distributions of stria vascularis capillary diameters, respectively. After chronic stimulation, no significant group changes in thresholds were seen; however, elevated thresholds at 1 kHz in implanted, stimulated animals were significantly correlated with decreased presynaptic ribbon and postsynaptic receptor counts. Inner and outer hair cell counts did not differ between groups and were not correlated with threshold shifts at any frequency. As in the previous study in a normal-hearing model, stria vascularis capillary changes were associated with immediate hearing loss after implantation, while little to no hair cell loss was observed even in cochlear regions with threshold shifts as large as 40-50 dB. These findings again support a role of lateral wall blood flow changes, rather than hair cell loss, in hearing loss after surgical trauma, and implicate the endocochlear potential as a factor in implantation-induced hearing loss. Further, the analysis of the hair cell ribbons and post-synaptic receptors suggest that delayed hearing loss may be linked to synapse or peripheral nerve loss due to stimulation excitotoxicity or inflammation. Further research is needed to separate these potential mechanisms of delayed hearing loss.

Project description:IntroductionTinnitus is the perception of sound without an external stimulus, often experienced as a ringing or buzzing sound. Subjective tinnitus is assumed to origin from changes in neural activity caused by reduced or lack of auditory input, for instance due to hearing loss. Since auditory deprivation is thought to be one of the causes of tinnitus, increasing the auditory input by cochlear implantation might be a possible treatment. In studies assessing cochlear implantation for patients with hearing loss, tinnitus relief was seen as a secondary outcome. Therefore, we will assess the effect of cochlear implantation in patients with primarily tinnitus complaints.Method and analysisIn this randomised controlled trial starting in January 2021 at the ENT department of the UMC Utrecht (the Netherlands), patients with a primary complaint of tinnitus will be included. Fifty patients (Tinnitus Functional Index (TFI) >32, Beck's Depression Index <19, pure tone average at 0.5, 1, 2 and 4 kHz: bilateral threshold between 50 and ≤75 dB) will be randomised towards cochlear implantation or no intervention. Primary outcome of the study is tinnitus burden as measured by the TFI. Outcomes of interest are tinnitus severity, hearing performances (tinnitus pitch and loudness, speech perception), quality of life, depression and patient-related changes. Outcomes will be evaluated prior to implantation and at 3 and 6 months after the surgery. The control group will receive questionnaires at 3 and 6 months after randomisation. We expect a significant difference between the cochlear implant recipients and the control group for tinnitus burden.Ethics and disseminationThis research protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the University Medical Center (UMC) Utrecht (NL70319.041.19, V5.0, January 2021). The trial results will be made accessible to the public in a peer-review journal.Trial registration numberTrial registration number NL8693; Pre-results.

Dataset Information

Long-term asymmetric hearing affects cochlear implantation outcomes differently in adults with pre- and postlingual hearing loss.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets