Cochlear Function in Adults Exposed to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2.

INTRODUCTION: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a viral infection with a wide variety of symptoms, including fever, coughing, sneezing, fatigue, and a loss of taste and smell. Moreover, there are some recent studies that investigate the effects of SARS-CoV-2 on hearing and auditory performance. With this current study, we investigate the early effects of the coronavirus disease on hair cells in the cochlea. METHODS: In the current study, there were 25 subjects (17 females, 8 males) who tested positive for polymerase chain reaction on nasopharyngeal swabs. They had reported normal auditory functions and no history of otology before SARS-CoV-2. To determine auditory functions, pure-tone audiometry, otoacoustic emissions (OAE) tests, and threshold equalizing noise (TEN) tests were used. RESULTS: Although the hearing thresholds increased at higher frequencies, they were within normal limits according to four-frequency pure-tone averages. All participants had normal OAE, and there were no detected dead regions for any of the subjects. Even so, there were significant increases in hearing thresholds in TEN. CONCLUSION: There is no cochlear dysfunction discovered by OAE and TEN in SARS-CoV-2-affected individuals. Nonetheless, the increase in hearing thresholds at higher frequencies, other than the pure-tone average frequencies detected by TEN, and the decrease in the presence of detected OAE could be related to deterioration in the basal part of the cochlea.

Audiological profile of adult Long COVID patients.

INTRODUCTION: Hearing loss is one of the self-reported symptoms of Long COVID patients, however data from objective and subjective audiological tests demonstrating diminished hearing in Long COVID patients has not been published. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Respondents of a large Long COVID online survey were invited to the ENT-department for an otologic exam. The participants were split into three groups based on their history of SARS-CoV-2 infection and persistence of symptoms. Respondents with a history of a SARS-CoV-2 infection were allocated to the Long COVID group, if they reported persistent symptoms and to the Ex COVID group, if they had regained their previous level of health. Participants without a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection made up the No COVID control group. In total, 295 ears were examined with otoscopy, tympanograms, pure tone audiometry and otoacoustic emissions. Ears with known preexisting hearing loss or status post ear surgery, as well as those with abnormal otoscopic findings, non-type A tympanograms or negative Rinne test were excluded. RESULTS: Compared to the No COVID and Ex COVID groups, we did not find a clinically significant difference in either hearing thresholds or frequency specific TEOAEs. However, at 500 Hz the data from the left ear, but not the right ear showed a significantly better threshold in the Ex COVID group, compared to Long COVID and No COVID groups. Any of the other tested frequencies between 500 Hz and 8 kHz were not significantly different between the different groups. There was a significantly lower frequency-specific signal-to-noise-ratio of the TEOAEs in the Long COVID compared to the No COVID group at 2.8 kHz. At all other frequencies, there were no significant differences between the three groups in the TEOAE signal-to-noise-ratio. CONCLUSION: This study detected no evidence of persistent cochlear damage months after SARS-CoV-2 infection in a large cohort of Long COVID patients, as well as those fully recovered.

Slight High-Frequency Hearing Loss, Effect of COVID-19 or Hydroxychloroquine Usage?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Concerns about ototoxic and vestibulotoxic effects have been raised with the use of antiviruses in the treatment of COVID-19. This study aimed to determine the effect of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and examine the auditory system and its associated auditory and vestibular symptoms in patients with COVID-19. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective study. PATIENTS: Thirty patients with a history of HCQ (HCQ+) and 30 patients without drug use (HCQ-), and 30 healthy adults as the control group participated. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Audiological assessments and evaluation of audio-vestibular symptoms. Evaluations were also repeated 1 month later. RESULTS: Both HCQ+ and HCQ- groups showed poor pure-tone audiometry (PTA) thresholds and decreased transient evoked otoacoustic emission amplitudes at high frequencies in comparison to the healthy group. Despite the lack of significant differences in PTA between the two groups of patients, the differences in transient evoked otoacoustic emission amplitudes were significant. PTA thresholds and otoacoustic emission showed improvement after 1 month. Dizziness was the most common symptom that was reduced after 1 month. CONCLUSION: Slight hearing loss was seen in patients with COVID-19 with or without HCQ. Also, hearing thresholds in the HCQ+ group did not show a significant difference compared with the HCQ- group. Nevertheless, it seems that more damage is done to the hair cells of patients with HCQ intake than in other patients. Hence, the ototoxicity effect of high doses of HCQ use in the COVID-19 patients should be considered. A relative improvement in the hearing was seen over time in both patient groups.

COVID-19 during pregnancy and its impact on the developing auditory system.

BACKGROUND: This study compared distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) and click-evoked auditory brainstem responses (ABRs) recorded from infants whose mother had Covid-19 during pregnancy (Covid-19 group) to infants whose mother did not have Covid-19 (Control group) during pregnancy. METHODS: This study retrospectively examined records of infants in the Covid-19 group (n = 15) and control group (n = 46) who had distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) and click-evoked auditory brainstem responses (ABRs) recorded as part of their clinical assessment. DPOAE amplitudes, absolute latencies (I, III, and V), and I-V interpeak intervals were examined. RESULTS: DPOAE amplitudes were similar between the Covid-19 group and the control group. The absolute latency of wave I was similar between groups. But absolute latencies III and V and I-V interpeak intervals of the Covid-19 group were significantly prolonged compared to the control group. CONCLUSION: Covid-19 infection and its complications during pregnancy may not affect the cochlear function but may affect the functioning of the auditory brainstem.

Harmonicity aids hearing in noise.

Hearing in noise is a core problem in audition, and a challenge for hearing-impaired listeners, yet the underlying mechanisms are poorly understood. We explored whether harmonic frequency relations, a signature property of many communication sounds, aid hearing in noise for normal hearing listeners. We measured detection thresholds in noise for tones and speech synthesized to have harmonic or inharmonic spectra. Harmonic signals were consistently easier to detect than otherwise identical inharmonic signals. Harmonicity also improved discrimination of sounds in noise. The largest benefits were observed for two-note up-down "pitch" discrimination and melodic contour discrimination, both of which could be performed equally well with harmonic and inharmonic tones in quiet, but which showed large harmonic advantages in noise. The results show that harmonicity facilitates hearing in noise, plausibly by providing a noise-robust pitch cue that aids detection and discrimination.

Audiological findings in individuals diagnosed with COVID-19.

PURPOSE: It is thought that COVID-19 may cause hearing loss, but its effects on the hearing system are not clear. This study aimed to reveal the effects of COVID-19 on the auditory system by using various audiological measurement methods in individuals diagnosed with COVID-19. METHODS: Thirty individuals between the ages of 18-45, who were diagnosed with COVID-19 by PCR at least one month ago, and had no pre-COVID-19 hearing loss complaints, constituted the test group. Thirty individuals aged between 18 and 30 years and who had no history of hearing loss constituted the control group. Audiological evaluations of all participants were made with pure-tone audiometry, high-frequency audiometry, transient-evoked otoacoustic emission (TEOAE), distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE), and auditory brainstem response (ABR) measurements. RESULTS: A significant difference was found between the groups at all high frequencies between 4 and 14 kHz (p < 0.05). TEOAE amplitudes at 1500 Hz, 2000 Hz and 4000 Hz frequencies and DPOAE amplitudes at 4003 Hz and higher frequencies were significantly lower in the test group (p < 0.05). While there was a significant difference between the I, III and V absolute latencies between the groups (p < 0.05), there was no significant difference between the I-III, III-V and I-V interpeak latencies (p > 0.05) as a result of the ABR test. CONCLUSION: This study showed that COVID-19 can cause cochlear damage, especially at high frequencies. More studies are needed to determine the effects of COVID-19 on the auditory system.

Comparison of pure tone audiometry thresholds and transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) of patients with and without Covid-19 pneumonia.

OBJECTIVE: COVID-19 is an infectious disease caused by the new coronavirus that starts similar to an upper respiratory tract infection and causes death by causing pneumonia and vasculopathy. Many viral infections are known to cause hearing loss. In this study, pure-tone audiometry (PTA) thresholds and Transient Evoked Otoacoustic Emissions (TEOAE) results were compared across patients with COVID-19 disease and COVID-19 pneumonia, and control group patients. METHODS: The study included 240 patients in the age range of 18-50 years. The patients were divided into three groups of 80 patients as the control (no disease), COVID-19 (nonpneumonia), Covid-19 (pneumonia) groups. PTA and TEOAE tests were performed on the control group patients and the results were recorded. PTA and TEOAE tests were performed in the COVID-19 groups in the first and third months after the infection ended. Each test was performed twice; the results were recorded, and the mean of the two results was calculated. RESULTS: PTA results and TEOAE amplitudes in the first and third months were not significantly different between the COVID-19 non-pneumonia group and the control group (p > 0.05), between the COVID-19 pneumonia group and the control group (p > 0.05), and between the COVID-19 non-pneumonia group and the COVID-19 pneumonia group (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Despite minimal impairment and minimal amplitude decreases in patients, who recovered from COVID-19, such changes were found to become restored in the third month. Furthermore, no significant changes were observed to indicate COVID-19- associated hearing loss.

The effects of SARS-CoV-2 on hearing thresholds in COVID-19 patients with non-hospitalized mild disease.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 may have many nonspecific symptoms, such as hearing loss, tinnitus and dizziness. This study aims to investigate the effects of SARS-CoV-2 on the hearing thresholds of patients with COVID-19. METHODS: A total of 20 patients aged 20-55 years who were diagnosed with COVID-19 were included in this study. The relationship between the pure-tone thresholds of patients before and after COVID-19 was evaluated. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between bone conduction pure-tone thresholds in all frequencies before and after COVID-19. CONCLUSION: SARS-CoV-2 has no effects on the hearing thresholds in patients with non-hospitalized mild COVID-19 disease. Further studies are needed to investigate the possible effects of SARS-CoV-2 on the auditory system.

Does COVID-19 have an impact on hearing?

BACKGROUNDS: SARS-CoV-2 is known to be a neurotrophic virus. However, the effect of this virus on the hearing system is still uncertain. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to investigate the possible effect of COVID-19 on hearing. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty healthcare workers who had COVID-19 after hearing evaluation with pure tone audiometry (PTA) for any reason in the last 1 year were included in the study. PTA and transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) tests were performed in 15 of 30 patients during the active infection period. For all 30 patients, otoscopic examination plus PTA and TEOAE tests were performed at the end of the first month after their treatment. RESULTS: When the PTA results of 30 patients (60 ears) before and after COVID-19 were compared, a significant decrease in hearing level was found only at 1000 Hz (p < .05). There were no significant differences at other frequencies. When the PTA and TEAOE test results of 15 patients (30 ears) that were performed during and after COVID-19 were compared, no significant differences were found. CONCLUSION AND SIGNIFICANCE: We conclude that COVID-19 may cause hearing loss. However, this result needs to be confirmed with comprehensive studies to be conducted in larger patient groups.

Influence of Postponed Follow-Up after Cochlear Implant Activation during the COVID-19 Pandemic on Aided Sound Field Detection and Speech Recognition.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to assess the influence of postponing the first post-activation follow-up due to the COVID-19 pandemic on the aided sound field detection thresholds and speech recognition of cochlear implant (CI) users. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed at a tertiary referral center. Two groups of adult CI recipients were evaluated: (1) patients whose first post-activation follow-up was postponed due to COVID-19 closures (postponed group; n = 10) and (2) a control group that attended recommended post-activation follow-ups prior to the COVID-19 pandemic (control group; n = 18). For both groups, electric thresholds were estimated at initial activation based on comfort levels and were measured behaviorally at subsequent post-activation follow-ups. For the control group, behavioral thresholds were measured at the 1-month follow-up. For the postponed group, behavioral thresholds were not measured until 3 months post-activation since the 1-month follow-up was postponed. The aided pure-tone average (PTA) and word recognition results were compared between groups at the 3-month follow-up and at an interim visit 2-9 weeks later. RESULTS: At the 3-month follow-up, the postponed group had significantly poorer word recognition (23 vs. 42%, p = 0.027) and aided PTA (42 vs. 37 dB HL, p = 0.041) than the control group. No significant differences were observed between 3-month data from the control group and interim data from the postponed group. CONCLUSIONS: The postponed follow-up after CI activation was associated with poorer outcomes, both in terms of speech recognition and aided audibility. However, these detrimental effects were reversed following provision of an individualized map, with behaviorally measured electric threshold and comfort levels. While adult CI recipients demonstrate an improvement in speech recognition with estimated electric thresholds, the present results suggest that behavioral mapping within the initial weeks of device use may support optimal outcomes.

[Hearing function in children after new coronavirus infection (COVID-19)]. / Sostoyanie slukha u detei, perenesshikh novuyu koronavirusnuyu infektsiyu (COVID-19).

The information about hearing status of patients who have had a COVID-19 is scattered. There are no studies among children population. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate hearing function in children after coronavirus infection. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 87 children aged from 5 months to 17 years who have had a new coronavirus infection were examined in three cities of Russia (St. Petersburg, Novosibirsk and Surgut). Audiologic examination depended on the age and included: otoscopy, TEOAE and DPOAE, ABR, impedansometry, pure tone audiometry, speech audiometry in quiet and noise. Fisher, LittlEARS and PEACH questionnaires were used as well. An evaluation of central auditory processing was performed in case of indications. RESULTS: In 80 children (92%) otoscopy didn't revealed any problems. All children had type A tympanogram. Acoustic reflex was registered in 49 children (56%), wasn't registered on 1-2 frequencies in 27 (31%) children, was registered on only 1 frequency or wasn't registered at all in 11 (13%) children. OAE was present in 83 (95%) children. Audiometric thresholds in all children were within a normal range. Speech intelligibility in quiet and noise in most cases was normal. 7 children with poor speech intelligibility or low Fisher questionnaire results got an extended examination. Binaural fusion speech test, dichotic test, RuMatrix test, gap detection test data showed no signs of central auditory processing disorders. CONCLUSION: There are no cases of hearing loss or central auditory processing disorders were found in children after new coronavirus infection. Due to variety of symptoms and long-term consequences of COVID-19 further hearing examination is required in this group of patients.

Implementation of Mobile Audiometry During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the utility of portable audiometry became more apparent as elective procedures were deferred in an effort to limit exposure to health care providers. Herein, we retrospectively evaluated mobile-based audiometry in the emergency department and outpatient otology and audiology clinics. Air conduction thresholds with mobile audiometry were within 5 dB in 66% of tests (95% CI, 62.8%-69.09%) and within 10 dB in 84% of tests (95% CI, 81.4%-86.2%) as compared with conventional audiometry. No significant differences were noted between mobile-based and conventional audiometry at any frequencies, except 8 kHz (P < .05). The sensitivity and specificity for screening for hearing loss were 94.3% (95% CI, 91.9%-96.83%) and 92.3% (95% CI, 90.1%-94.4%), respectively. While automated threshold audiometry does not replace conventional audiometry, mobile audiometry is a promising screening tool when conventional audiometry is not available.

The effect of coronavirus disease 2019 on the hearing system.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate different auditory regions with audiological tests, based on the presumption that there may be damage to the structures in the hearing system after coronavirus disease 2019. METHODS: Twenty individuals with no history of coronavirus disease 2019 and 27 individuals diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 were compared. Pure tone, speech and extended high-frequency audiometry, acoustic immitansmetry, transient evoked and distortion product otoacoustic emissions testing, and auditory brainstem response testing were conducted. RESULTS: The pure tone audiometry and extended high-frequency mean threshold values were higher in the coronavirus disease 2019 group. The transient evoked otoacoustic emissions signal-to-noise ratios were bilaterally lower at 4 kHz in individuals with a coronavirus disease 2019 history. In the auditory brainstem response test, only the interpeak latencies of waves III-V were significantly different between groups. CONCLUSION: Coronavirus disease 2019 may cause damage to the hearing system. Patients should be followed up in the long term with advanced audiological evaluation methods in order to determine the extent and level of damage.

Mild and moderate COVID-19 disease does not affect hearing function permanently: a cross-sectional study involving young and middle-aged healthcare givers.

PURPOSE: To assess the hearing function of patients with mild and moderate COVID-19. METHODS: The hospital staffs recovered from COVID-19 were included. The candidates who had an ear disease or progressive hearing loss prior to COVID-19, or having been hospitalised because of severe and critical COVID-19 were excluded. The age, sex, symptoms during COVID-19, and medications received for the disease were noted. The hearing thresholds (HT) of the participants who had an audiogram before having COVID-19 disease were recorded. A pure tone audiometry was conducted to all. The participants were classified into two groups; Group 1: participants who had an audiogram previously, Group 2: participants who didn't have an audiogram previously. The changes of the HTs of the participants in Group 1 were analyzed. The HTs of the participants in Group 2 were documented without any comparison. The HTs of all participants were also analyzed by classifying them into subgroups according to their symptoms during, and medications received for COVID-19. RESULTS: Fifty-four males and 47 females (18-59 years) were included. The participants' HTs in Group 1 (n = 31) did not change significantly at any of the frequencies after having COVID-19 (p > 0.05). The pure tone averages of the participants in Group 2 (n = 70) were below 25 dB and none of the participants reported worsening of their hearing permanently. The differences between the HTs of none of the subgroups were statistically significant (p > 0.05, p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Mild and moderate COVID-19 and its treatments did not affect the hearing function permanently.

Sudden hearing loss and coronavirus disease 2019: the role of corticosteroid intra-tympanic injection in hearing improvement.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 was first seen in December 2019. Due to the insidious and complex nature of the disease, the list of symptoms is rapidly expanding. So far, few studies have reported sudden sensorineural hearing loss as a possible symptom of coronavirus disease 2019. CASE REPORT: A 60-year-old woman with a complaint of sudden sensorineural hearing loss and subjective severe tinnitus presented to the ENT clinic. Coronavirus disease 2019 was subsequently confirmed with a polymerase chain reaction test. At the time of presentation, she was treated with intra-tympanic dexamethasone. Improvements in hearing threshold and speech perception, and a subjective reduction in tinnitus, were observed after treatment. CONCLUSION: This case report supports evidence from other case reports of a possible association between coronavirus disease 2019 and sudden sensorineural hearing loss. Sudden sensorineural hearing loss may be a symptom of this disease that behaves as an underlying aggravating factor. Intra-tympanic injection of corticosteroids is recommended for managing these patients during the pandemic.

Covid-19 Lockdown Affects Hearing Disability and Handicap in Diverse Ways: A Rapid Online Survey Study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to explore the perceived effects of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) social distancing restrictions and safety measures on people with hearing loss. DESIGN: Participants were 129 adults (48.1% female, mean age 64.4 years) with an audiometric hearing loss, living in Glasgow, Scotland. A rapidly deployed 24-item online questionnaire asked about the effects of certain aspects of lockdown, including face masks, social distancing, and video calling, on participants' behavior, emotions, hearing performance, practical issues, and tinnitus. Data were analyzed descriptively across the entire sample, and with Chi-squared tests for differences between subgroups self-reporting relatively good and relatively poor unaided hearing, respectively. Additional free-text responses provided further perspectives. RESULTS: Behavior: Video calls are used more frequently than prelockdown. The better-hearing group use their hearing aids less. Emotions: There is increased anxiety (especially among the worse hearing group) concerning verbal communication situations and access to audiology services, and greater rumination about one's own hearing loss. Enjoyment of group video calls is mixed. The worse hearing group shows substantial relief at not being obliged to attend challenging social gatherings. Across both groups, a majority would like to see all key workers equipped with transparent face masks. Hearing performance: A large majority finds it hard to converse with people in face masks due to muffled sound and lack of speechreading cues, but conversing at a safe distance is not universally problematic. In the worse hearing group, performance in video calls is generally inferior to face-to-face, but similar to telephone calls. Those who use live subtitling in video calls appreciate their value. TV and radio updates about Covid-19 are easy to follow for most respondents. There is only weak evidence of face mask fixtures interfering with hearing aids on the ear, and of tinnitus having worsened during lockdown. CONCLUSIONS: With due regard for the limitations of this rapid study, we find that there are many negative-and a few positive-effects of Covid-19 restrictions and safety measures on people with hearing loss. From a societal perspective, the widespread adoption of clear face masks may alleviate some of the difficulties and anxieties this population experience. From an individual perspective, one may consider using live subtitles on video calls. Manufacturers of hearing devices should consider developing processing modes and accessories specifically designed for video calls. Finally, repair and maintenance services should be resumed as soon as it is safe to do so.

Pure-tone audiometry without bone-conduction thresholds: using the digits-in-noise test to detect conductive hearing loss.

Objective: COVID-19 has been prohibitive to traditional audiological services. No- or low-touch audiological assessment outside a sound-booth precludes test batteries including bone conduction audiometry. This study investigated whether conductive hearing loss (CHL) can be differentiated from sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) using pure-tone air conduction audiometry and a digits-in-noise (DIN) test.Design: A retrospective sample was analysed using binomial logistic regressions, which determined the effects of pure tone thresholds or averages, speech recognition threshold (SRT), and age on the likelihood that participants had CHL or bilateral SNHL.Study sample: Data of 158 adults with bilateral SNHL (n = 122; PTA0.5-4 kHz > 25 dB HL bilaterally) or CHL (n = 36; air conduction PTA0.5-4 kHz > 25 dB HL and ≥20 dB air bone gap in the affected ears) were included.Results: The model which best discriminated between CHL and bilateral SNHL used low-frequency pure-tone average (PTA), diotic DIN SRT, and age with an area under the ROC curve of 0.98 and sensitivity and specificity of 97.2 and 93.4%, respectively.Conclusion: CHL can be accurately distinguished from SNHL using pure-tone air conduction audiometry and a diotic DIN. Restrictions on traditional audiological assessment due to COVID-19 require lower touch audiological care which reduces infection risk.