Otoacoustic emissions in African mole-rats.

African mole-rats display highly derived hearing that is characterized by low sensitivity and a narrow auditory range restricted to low frequencies < 10 kHz. Recently, it has been suggested that two species of these rodents do not exhibit distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAE), which was interpreted as evidence for a lack of cochlear amplification. If true, this would make them unique among mammals. However, both theoretical considerations on the generation of DPOAE as well as previously published experimental evidence challenge this assumption. We measured DPOAE and stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emissions (SFOAE) in three species of African mole-rats (Ansell's mole-rat - Fukomys anselli; Mashona mole-rat - Fukomys darlingi; naked mole-rat - Heterocephalus glaber) and found unexceptional otoacoustic emission values. Measurements were complicated by the remarkably long, narrow and curved external ear canals of these animals, for which we provide a morphological description. Both DPOAE and SFOAE displayed the highest amplitudes near 1 kHz, which corresponds to the region of best hearing in all tested species, as well as to the frequency region of the low-frequency acoustic fovea previously described in Ansell's mole-rat. Thus, the cochlea in African mole-rats shares the ability to generate evoked otoacoustic emission with other mammals.

Musical Emotion Categorization with Vocoders of Varying Temporal and Spectral Content.

While previous research investigating music emotion perception of cochlear implant (CI) users observed that temporal cues informing tempo largely convey emotional arousal (relaxing/stimulating), it remains unclear how other properties of the temporal content may contribute to the transmission of arousal features. Moreover, while detailed spectral information related to pitch and harmony in music - often not well perceived by CI users- reportedly conveys emotional valence (positive, negative), it remains unclear how the quality of spectral content contributes to valence perception. Therefore, the current study used vocoders to vary temporal and spectral content of music and tested music emotion categorization (joy, fear, serenity, sadness) in 23 normal-hearing participants. Vocoders were varied with two carriers (sinewave or noise; primarily modulating temporal information), and two filter orders (low or high; primarily modulating spectral information). Results indicated that emotion categorization was above-chance in vocoded excerpts but poorer than in a non-vocoded control condition. Among vocoded conditions, better temporal content (sinewave carriers) improved emotion categorization with a large effect while better spectral content (high filter order) improved it with a small effect. Arousal features were comparably transmitted in non-vocoded and vocoded conditions, indicating that lower temporal content successfully conveyed emotional arousal. Valence feature transmission steeply declined in vocoded conditions, revealing that valence perception was difficult for both lower and higher spectral content. The reliance on arousal information for emotion categorization of vocoded music suggests that efforts to refine temporal cues in the CI user signal may immediately benefit their music emotion perception.

Carbamazepine induces upward frequency shifts of spontaneous otoacoustic emissions.

In three subjects, we measured spontaneous otoacoustic emissions (SOAEs) when they were using carbamazepine (CBZ), and compared this to the SOAE measurement when they were not using CBZ. We observed 14 SOAEs showing a consistent upward shift of center frequency, related to CBZ intake. On average, the magnitude of the frequency shift increased with increasing frequency. The magnitude of the shift was 30-104 Hz, at frequencies ranging from 1.3 to 2.3 kHz, corresponding to a shift between 2.3 and 4.5%. Compared to other causes and manipulations known to change SOAE frequency, these shifts are relatively large. The underlying mechanism is most likely an increased stiffness of the cochlear partition. This would also explain the downward pitch shift due to CBZ, which has been reported by subjects with absolute pitch.

Self-reported music perception is related to quality of life and self-reported hearing abilities in cochlear implant users.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the relationship between self-reported music perception and appreciation and (1) quality of life (QoL), and (2) self-assessed hearing ability in 98 post-lingually deafened cochlear implant (CI) users with a wide age range. METHODS: Participants filled three questionnaires: (1) the Dutch Musical Background Questionnaire (DMBQ), which measures the music listening habits, the quality of the sound of music and the self-assessed perception of elements of music; (2) the Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire (NCIQ), which measures health-related QoL; (3) the Speech, Spatial and Qualities (SSQ) of hearing scale, which measures self-assessed hearing ability. Additionally, speech perception was behaviorally measured with a phoneme-in-word identification. RESULTS: A decline in music listening habits and a low rating of the quality of music after implantation are reported in DMBQ. A significant relationship is found between the music measures and the NCIQ and SSQ; no significant relationships are observed between the DMBQ and speech perception scores. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest some relationship between CI users' self-reported music perception ability and QoL and self-reported hearing ability. While the causal relationship is not currently evaluated, the findings may imply that music training programs and/or device improvements that improve music perception may improve QoL and hearing ability.

An auditory brainstem implant for treatment of unilateral tinnitus: protocol for an interventional pilot study.

INTRODUCTION: Tinnitus may have a very severe impact on the quality of life. Unfortunately, for many patients, a satisfactory treatment modality is lacking. The auditory brainstem implant (ABI) was originally indicated for hearing restoration in patients with non-functional cochlear nerves, for example, in neurofibromatosis type II. In analogy to a cochlear implant (CI), it has been demonstrated that an ABI may reduce tinnitus as a beneficial side effect. For tinnitus treatment, an ABI may have an advantage over a CI, as cochlear implantation can harm inner ear structures due to its invasiveness, while an ABI is presumed to not damage anatomical structures. This is the first study to implant an ABI to investigate its effect on intractable tinnitus. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this pilot study, 10 adults having incapacitating unilateral intractable tinnitus and ipsilateral severe hearing loss will have an ABI implanted. The ABI is switched on 6 weeks after implantation, followed by several fitting sessions aimed at finding an optimal stimulation strategy. The primary outcome will be the change in Tinnitus Functioning Index. Secondary outcomes will be tinnitus burden and quality of life (using Tinnitus Handicap Inventory and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale questionnaires), tinnitus characteristics (using Visual Analogue Scale, a tinnitus analysis), safety, audiometric and vestibular function. The end point is set at 1 year after implantation. Follow-up will continue until 5 years after implantation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board of the University Medical Centre Groningen, The Netherlands (METc 2015/479). The trial is registered at www.clinicialtrials.gov and will be updated if amendments are made. Results of this study will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and at scientific conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02630589. TRIAL STATUS: Inclusion of first patient in November 2017. Data collection is in progress. Trial is open for further inclusion. The trial ends at 5 years after inclusion of the last patient.

Comparison of Two Music Training Approaches on Music and Speech Perception in Cochlear Implant Users.

In normal-hearing (NH) adults, long-term music training may benefit music and speech perception, even when listening to spectro-temporally degraded signals as experienced by cochlear implant (CI) users. In this study, we compared two different music training approaches in CI users and their effects on speech and music perception, as it remains unclear which approach to music training might be best. The approaches differed in terms of music exercises and social interaction. For the pitch/timbre group, melodic contour identification (MCI) training was performed using computer software. For the music therapy group, training involved face-to-face group exercises (rhythm perception, musical speech perception, music perception, singing, vocal emotion identification, and music improvisation). For the control group, training involved group nonmusic activities (e.g., writing, cooking, and woodworking). Training consisted of weekly 2-hr sessions over a 6-week period. Speech intelligibility in quiet and noise, vocal emotion identification, MCI, and quality of life (QoL) were measured before and after training. The different training approaches appeared to offer different benefits for music and speech perception. Training effects were observed within-domain (better MCI performance for the pitch/timbre group), with little cross-domain transfer of music training (emotion identification significantly improved for the music therapy group). While training had no significant effect on QoL, the music therapy group reported better perceptual skills across training sessions. These results suggest that more extensive and intensive training approaches that combine pitch training with the social aspects of music therapy may further benefit CI users.

The Cochlear Implant EEG Artifact Recorded From an Artificial Brain for Complex Acoustic Stimuli.

Electroencephalographic (EEG) recordings provide objective estimates of listeners' cortical processing of sounds and of the status of their speech perception system. For profoundly deaf listeners with cochlear implants (CIs), the applications of EEG are limited because the device adds electric artifacts to the recordings. This restricts the possibilities for the neural-based metrics of speech processing by CI users, for instance to gauge cortical reorganization due to individual's hearing loss history. This paper describes the characteristics of the CI artifact as recorded with an artificial head substitute, and reports how the artifact is affected by the properties of the acoustical input signal versus the settings of the device. METHODS: We created a brain substitute using agar that simulates the brain's conductivity, placed it in a human skull, and performed EEG recordings with CIs from three different manufacturers. As stimuli, we used simple and complex non-speech stimuli, as well as naturally produced continuous speech. We examined the effect of manipulating device settings in both controlled experimental CI configurations and real clinical maps. RESULTS: An increase in the magnitude of the stimulation current through the device settings increases also the magnitude of the artifact. The artifact recorded to speech is smaller in magnitude than for non-speech stimuli due to signal-inherent amplitude modulations. CONCLUSION: The CI EEG artifact for speech appears more difficult to detect than for simple stimuli. Since the artifact differs across CI users, due to their individual clinical maps, the method presented enables insight into the individual manifestations of the artifact.

Objective and Subjective Measures of Simultaneous vs Sequential Bilateral Cochlear Implants in Adults: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: To date, no randomized clinical trial on the comparison between simultaneous and sequential bilateral cochlear implants (BiCIs) has been performed. Objective: To investigate the hearing capabilities and the self-reported benefits of simultaneous BiCIs compared with those of sequential BiCIs. Design, Setting, and Participants: A multicenter randomized clinical trial was conducted between January 12, 2010, and September 2, 2012, at 5 tertiary referral centers among 40 participants eligible for BiCIs. Main inclusion criteria were postlingual severe to profound hearing loss, age 18 to 70 years, and a maximum duration of 10 years without hearing aid use in both ears. Data analysis was conducted from May 24 to June 12, 2016. Interventions: The simultaneous BiCI group received 2 cochlear implants during 1 surgical procedure. The sequential BiCI group received 2 cochlear implants with an interval of 2 years between implants. Main Outcomes and Measures: First, the results 1 year after receiving simultaneous BiCIs were compared with the results 1 year after receiving sequential BiCIs. Second, the results of 3 years of follow-up for both groups were compared separately. The primary outcome measure was speech intelligibility in noise from straight ahead. Secondary outcome measures were speech intelligibility in noise from spatially separated sources, speech intelligibility in silence, localization capabilities, and self-reported benefits assessed with various hearing and quality of life questionnaires. Results: Nineteen participants were randomized to receive simultaneous BiCIs (11 women and 8 men; median age, 52 years [interquartile range, 36-63 years]), and another 19 participants were randomized to undergo sequential BiCIs (8 women and 11 men; median age, 54 years [interquartile range, 43-64 years]). Three patients did not receive a second cochlear implant and were unavailable for follow-up. Comparable results were found 1 year after simultaneous or sequential BiCIs for speech intelligibility in noise from straight ahead (difference, 0.9 dB [95% CI, -3.1 to 4.4 dB]) and all secondary outcome measures except for localization with a 30° angle between loudspeakers (difference, -10% [95% CI, -20.1% to 0.0%]). In the sequential BiCI group, all participants performed significantly better after the BiCIs on speech intelligibility in noise from spatially separated sources and on all localization tests, which was consistent with most of the participants' self-reported hearing capabilities. Speech intelligibility-in-noise results improved in the simultaneous BiCI group up to 3 years following the BiCIs. Conclusions and Relevance: This study shows comparable objective and subjective hearing results 1 year after receiving simultaneous BiCIs and sequential BiCIs with an interval of 2 years between implants. It also shows a significant benefit of sequential BiCIs over a unilateral cochlear implant. Until 3 years after receiving simultaneous BiCIs, speech intelligibility in noise significantly improved compared with previous years. Trial Registration: trialregister.nl Identifier: NTR1722.

Comparison of Bilateral and Unilateral Cochlear Implantation in Adults: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: The cost of bilateral cochlear implantation (BCI) is usually not reimbursed by insurance companies because of a lack of well-designed studies reporting the benefits of a second cochlear implant. OBJECTIVE: To determine the benefits of simultaneous BCI compared with unilateral cochlear implantation (UCI) in adults with postlingual deafness. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A multicenter randomized clinical trial was performed. The study took place in 5 Dutch tertiary referral centers: the University Medical Centers of Utrecht, Maastricht, Groningen, Leiden, and Nijmegen. Forty patients eligible for cochlear implantation met the study criteria and were included from January 12, 2010, through November 2, 2012. The main inclusion criteria were postlingual onset of hearing loss, age of 18 to 70 years, duration of hearing loss of less than 20 years, and a marginal hearing aid benefit. Two participants withdrew from the study before implantation. Nineteen participants were randomized to undergo UCI and 19 to undergo BCI. INTERVENTIONS: The BCI group received 2 cochlear implants during 1 surgery. The UCI group received 1 cochlear implant. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was the Utrecht Sentence Test with Adaptive Randomized Roving levels (speech in noise, both presented from straight ahead). Secondary outcomes were consonant-vowel-consonant words in silence, speech-intelligibility test with spatially separated sources (speech in noise from different directions), sound localization, and quality of hearing questionnaires. Before any data were collected, the hypothesis was that the BCI group would perform better on the objective and subjective tests that concerned speech intelligibility in noise and spatial hearing. RESULTS: Thirty-eight patients were included in the study. Fifteen patients in the BCI group used hearing aids before implantation compared with 19 in the UCI group. Otherwise, there were no significant differences between the groups' baseline characteristics. At 1-year follow-up, there were no significant differences between groups on the Utrecht Sentence Test with Adaptive Randomized Roving levels (9.1 dB, UCI group; 8.2 dB, BCI group; P = .39) or the consonant-vowel-consonant test (median percentage correct score 85.0% in the UCI group and 86.8% in the BCI group; P = .21). The BCI group performed significantly better than the UCI group when noise came from different directions (median speech reception threshold in noise, 14.4 dB, BCI group; 5.6 dB, BCI group; P <.001). The BCI group was better able to localize sounds (median correct score of 50.0% at 60°, UCI group; 96.7%, BCI group; P <.001). These results were consistent with the patients' self-reported hearing capabilities. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This randomized clinical trial demonstrates a significant benefit of simultaneous BCI above UCI in daily listening situations for adults with postlingual deafness. TRIAL REGISTRATION: trialregister.nl Identifier: NTR1722.

Effect of unilateral and simultaneous bilateral cochlear implantation on tinnitus: A Prospective Study.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To determine the effect of cochlear implantation on tinnitus perception in patients with severe bilateral postlingual sensorineural hearing loss and to demonstrate possible differences between unilateral and bilateral cochlear implantation. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective study. METHODS: Thirty-eight adult patients were included in this prospective study, as part of a multicenter randomized controlled trial investigating the benefits of bilateral cochlear implantation versus unilateral cochlear implantation. Pre- and postoperative tinnitus perception scores were evaluated, before and 1 year after implantation on three tinnitus questionnaires; the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI), the Tinnitus Questionnaire (TQ), and a visual analogue scale for tinnitus burden. RESULTS: Before implantation, the tinnitus prevalence was 42.1% (16 of 38) in the whole study group. One year after implantation, the tinnitus questionnaire scores had decreased in 71.4% according to the TQ and 80.0% according to the THI. Tinnitus was induced after cochlear implantation in six patients, five in the bilateral and one in the unilateral group. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that cochlear implantation is effective in the reduction of tinnitus in patients with bilateral sensorineural hearing loss who suffered from preoperative tinnitus. Conversely, tinnitus may also increase or even be induced by the cochlear implantation itself. Cochlear implant candidates should be well informed about these possible consequences before undergoing surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2b.

Cost-Utility of Bilateral Versus Unilateral Cochlear Implantation in Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To study the cost-utility of simultaneous bilateral cochlear implantation (CI) versus unilateral CI. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial (RCT). SETTING: Five tertiary referral centers. PATIENTS: Thirty-eight postlingually deafened adults eligible for cochlear implantation. INTERVENTIONS: A cost-utility analysis was performed from a health insurance perspective. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Utility was assessed using the HUI3, TTO, VAS on hearing, VAS on general health and EQ-5D. We modeled the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) of unilateral versus bilateral CI over periods of 2, 5, 10, 25 years, and actual life-expectancy. RESULTS: Direct costs for unilateral and bilateral CI were €43,883 ±â€Š€11,513(SD) and €87,765 ±â€Š€23,027(SD) respectively. Annual costs from the second year onward were €3,435 ±â€Š€1,085(SD) and €6,871 ±â€Š€2,169(SD), respectively. A cost-utility analysis revealed that a second implant became cost-effective after a 5- to 10-year period, based on the HUI3, TTO, and VAS on hearing. CONCLUSION: This is the first study that describes a cost-utility analysis to compare unilateral with simultaneous bilateral CI in postlingually deafened adults, using a multicenter RCT. Compared with accepted societal willingness-to-pay thresholds, simultaneous bilateral CI is a cost-effective treatment for patients with a life expectancy of 5-10 years or longer.

A Retrospective Multicenter Study Comparing Speech Perception Outcomes for Bilateral Implantation and Bimodal Rehabilitation.

OBJECTIVES: To compare speech perception outcomes between bilateral implantation (cochlear implants [CIs]) and bimodal rehabilitation (one CI on one side plus one hearing aid [HA] on the other side) and to explore the clinical factors that may cause asymmetric performances in speech intelligibility between the two ears in case of bilateral implantation. DESIGN: Retrospective data from 2247 patients implanted since 2003 in 15 international centers were collected. Intelligibility scores, measured in quiet and in noise, were converted into percentile ranks to remove differences between centers. The influence of the listening mode among three independent groups, one CI alone (n = 1572), bimodal listening (CI/HA, n = 589), and bilateral CIs (CI/CI, n = 86), was compared in an analysis taking into account the influence of other factors such as duration of profound hearing loss, age, etiology, and duration of CI experience. No within-subject comparison (i.e., monitoring outcome modifications in CI/HA subjects becoming CI/CI) was possible from this dataset. Further analyses were conducted on the CI/CI subgroup to investigate a number of factors, such as implantation side, duration of hearing loss, amount of residual hearing, and use of HAs that may explain asymmetric performances of this subgroup. RESULTS: Intelligibility ranked scores in quiet and in noise were significantly greater with both CI/CI and CI/HA than with a CI-alone group, and improvement with CI/CI (+11% and +16% in quiet and in noise, respectively) was significantly better than with CI/HA (+6% and +9% in quiet and in noise, respectively). From the CI/HA group, only subjects with ranked preoperative aided speech scores >60% performed as well as CI/CI participants. Furthermore, CI/CI subjects displayed significantly lower preoperative aided speech scores on average compared with that displayed by CI/HA subjects. Routine clinical data available from the present database did not explain the asymmetrical results of bilateral implantation. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective study, based on basic speech audiometry (no lateralization cues), indicates that, on average, a second CI is likely to provide slightly better postoperative speech outcome than an additional HA for people with very low preoperative performance. These results may be taken into consideration to refine surgical indications for CIs.

The musician effect: does it persist under degraded pitch conditions of cochlear implant simulations?

Cochlear implants (CIs) are auditory prostheses that restore hearing via electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve. Compared to normal acoustic hearing, sounds transmitted through the CI are spectro-temporally degraded, causing difficulties in challenging listening tasks such as speech intelligibility in noise and perception of music. In normal hearing (NH), musicians have been shown to better perform than non-musicians in auditory processing and perception, especially for challenging listening tasks. This "musician effect" was attributed to better processing of pitch cues, as well as better overall auditory cognitive functioning in musicians. Does the musician effect persist when pitch cues are degraded, as it would be in signals transmitted through a CI? To answer this question, NH musicians and non-musicians were tested while listening to unprocessed signals or to signals processed by an acoustic CI simulation. The task increasingly depended on pitch perception: (1) speech intelligibility (words and sentences) in quiet or in noise, (2) vocal emotion identification, and (3) melodic contour identification (MCI). For speech perception, there was no musician effect with the unprocessed stimuli, and a small musician effect only for word identification in one noise condition, in the CI simulation. For emotion identification, there was a small musician effect for both. For MCI, there was a large musician effect for both. Overall, the effect was stronger as the importance of pitch in the listening task increased. This suggests that the musician effect may be more rooted in pitch perception, rather than in a global advantage in cognitive processing (in which musicians would have performed better in all tasks). The results further suggest that musical training before (and possibly after) implantation might offer some advantage in pitch processing that could partially benefit speech perception, and more strongly emotion and music perception.

Music and quality of life in early-deafened late-implanted adult cochlear implant users.

HYPOTHESIS AND BACKGROUND: The early-deafened, late-implanted (EDLI) CI users constitute a relatively new and understudied clinical population. To contribute to a better understanding of the implantation outcome, this study evaluated this population for self-reported enjoyment and perception of music. Additionally, correlations of these measures with the self-reported quality of life and everyday hearing ability and a behaviorally measured word recognition test were explored. MATERIALS AND METHODS: EDLI CI users from the Northern Netherlands were sent 4 questionnaires: 1) Dutch Musical Background Questionnaire (enjoyment and perception of music), 2) Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire (quality of life), 3) Cochlear Implant Functioning Index (auditory-related functioning), and 4) Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (hearing ability). Complementary, behavioral word recognition in quiet tests (phoneme score) were completed. RESULTS: Twelve (60%) of 20 participants reported music to sound pleasant. In general, the self-perceived quality of music was scored positively. No correlations were observed between enjoyment and perception of music, quality of life, hearing ability, and word recognition. CONCLUSION: The results indicate that, differently than postlingually deafened, EDLI CI users enjoy music and rate the quality of music positively. Potential explanations for the absence of correlations between the music measures and the other outcomes could be that other factors, such as speech perception, contribute more to quality of life of EDLI CI users or that this group simply lacks previous exposure to music with acoustic hearing. Overall, these positive findings may give extra support for implant candidacy of early-deafened individuals, but further studies should be conducted.

The effectiveness of bilateral cochlear implants for severe-to-profound deafness in adults: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Assessment of the clinical effectiveness of bilateral cochlear implantation compared with unilateral cochlear implantation or bimodal stimulation, in adults with severe-to-profound hearing loss. In 2007, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) in the U.K. conducted a systematic review on cochlear implantation. This study forms an update of the adult part of the NICE review. DATA SOURCES: The electronic databases MEDLINE and Embase were searched for English language studies published between October 2006 and March 2011. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were included that compared bilateral cochlear implantation with unilateral cochlear implantation and/or with bimodal stimulation, in adults with severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss. Speech perception in quiet and in noise, sound localization and lateralization, speech production, health-related quality of life, and functional outcomes were analyzed. DATA EXTRACTION: Data extraction forms were used to describe study characteristics and the level of evidence. DATA SYNTHESIS: The effect size was calculated to compare different outcome measures. CONCLUSION: Pooling of data was not possible because of the heterogeneity of the studies. As in the NICE review, the level of evidence of the included studies was low, although some of the additional studies showed less risk of bias. All studies showed a significant bilateral benefit in localization over unilateral cochlear implantation. Bilateral cochlear implants were beneficial for speech perception in noise under certain conditions and several self-reported measures. Most speech perception in quiet outcomes did not show a bilateral benefit. The current review provides additional evidence in favor of bilateral cochlear implantation, even in complex listening situations.

Factors affecting auditory performance of postlinguistically deaf adults using cochlear implants: an update with 2251 patients.

OBJECTIVE: To update a 15-year-old study of 800 postlinguistically deaf adult patients showing how duration of severe to profound hearing loss, age at cochlear implantation (CI), age at onset of severe to profound hearing loss, etiology and CI experience affected CI outcome. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective multicenter study. METHODS: Data from 2251 adult patients implanted since 2003 in 15 international centers were collected and speech scores in quiet were converted to percentile ranks to remove differences between centers. RESULTS: The negative effect of long duration of severe to profound hearing loss was less important in the new data than in 1996; the effects of age at CI and age at onset of severe to profound hearing loss were delayed until older ages; etiology had a smaller effect, and the effect of CI experience was greater with a steeper learning curve. Patients with longer durations of severe to profound hearing loss were less likely to improve with CI experience than patients with shorter duration of severe to profound hearing loss. CONCLUSIONS: The factors that were relevant in 1996 were still relevant in 2011, although their relative importance had changed. Relaxed patient selection criteria, improved clinical management of hearing loss, modifications of surgical practice, and improved devices may explain the differences.

Pre-, per- and postoperative factors affecting performance of postlinguistically deaf adults using cochlear implants: a new conceptual model over time.

OBJECTIVE: To test the influence of multiple factors on cochlear implant (CI) speech performance in quiet and in noise for postlinguistically deaf adults, and to design a model of predicted auditory performance with a CI as a function of the significant factors. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective multi-centre study. METHODS: Data from 2251 patients implanted since 2003 in 15 international centres were collected. Speech scores in quiet and in noise were converted into percentile ranks to remove differences between centres. The influence of 15 pre-, per- and postoperative factors, such as the duration of moderate hearing loss (mHL), the surgical approach (cochleostomy or round window approach), the angle of insertion, the percentage of active electrodes, and the brand of device were tested. The usual factors, duration of profound HL (pHL), age, etiology, duration of CI experience, that are already known to have an influence, were included in the statistical analyses. RESULTS: The significant factors were: the pure tone average threshold of the better ear, the brand of device, the percentage of active electrodes, the use of hearing aids (HAs) during the period of pHL, and the duration of mHL. CONCLUSIONS: A new model was designed showing a decrease of performance that started during the period of mHL, and became faster during the period of pHL. The use of bilateral HAs slowed down the related central reorganization that is the likely cause of the decreased performance.

Musical background not associated with self-perceived hearing performance or speech perception in postlingual cochlear-implant users.

In normal-hearing listeners, musical background has been observed to change the sound representation in the auditory system and produce enhanced performance in some speech perception tests. Based on these observations, it has been hypothesized that musical background can influence sound and speech perception, and as an extension also the quality of life, by cochlear-implant users. To test this hypothesis, this study explored musical background [using the Dutch Musical Background Questionnaire (DMBQ)], and self-perceived sound and speech perception and quality of life [using the Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire (NCIQ) and the Speech Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ)] in 98 postlingually deafened adult cochlear-implant recipients. In addition to self-perceived measures, speech perception scores (percentage of phonemes recognized in words presented in quiet) were obtained from patient records. The self-perceived hearing performance was associated with the objective speech perception. Forty-one respondents (44% of 94 respondents) indicated some form of formal musical training. Fifteen respondents (18% of 83 respondents) judged themselves as having musical training, experience, and knowledge. No association was observed between musical background (quantified by DMBQ), and self-perceived hearing-related performance or quality of life (quantified by NCIQ and SSQ), or speech perception in quiet.

The effect of static ear canal pressure on human spontaneous otoacoustic emissions: spectral width as a measure of the intra-cochlear oscillation amplitude.

Spontaneous otoacoustic emissions can be detected as peaks in the Fourier spectrum of a microphone signal recorded from the ear canal. The height, center frequency, and spectral width of SOAE peaks changed when a static pressure was applied to the ear canal. Most commonly, with either increasing or decreasing static pressure, the frequency increased, the amplitude decreased, and the width increased. These changes are believed to result from changes in the middle ear properties. Specifically, reduced middle ear transmission is assumed to attenuate the amplitude of emissions. We reconsidered this explanation by investigating the relation between peak height and width. We showed that the spectral width of SOAE peaks is approximately proportional to . This is consistent with a (Rayleigh) oscillator model in which broadening of the SOAE peak is caused by broadband intra-cochlear noise, which is assumed to be independent of static ear canal pressure. The relation between emission peak height and width implicates that the intra-cochlear oscillation amplitude attentuates relative to the intra-cochlear noise level when a static ear canal pressure is applied. Apparently, ear canal static pressure directly affects the active mechanics in the inner ear.

The effectiveness of bilateral cochlear implants for severe-to-profound deafness in children: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical effectiveness of bilateral cochlear implantation compared with unilateral cochlear implantation alone or with a contralateral hearing aid (bimodal stimulation), in children with severe-to-profound hearing loss. Recently, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) in the U.K. has conducted a systematic review on cochlear implantation. We decided to update the pediatric part of the NICE review. DATA SOURCES: The electronic databases MEDLINE and Embase were searched for European, North American, and Australasian studies published between October 2006 and June 2009. Reference lists of the included articles were also searched for relevant articles. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were included if they comprised data on comparisons between bilateral cochlear implantation and unilateral cochlear implantation and/or bilateral cochlear implantation and bimodal stimulation, in children with severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss. The following outcome measures were analyzed: audiological, speech perception, speech production, functional capacities, health-related quality of life, and/or educational outcomes. DATA EXTRACTION: Characteristics of the participants, interventions, outcomes, and methodological comments were entered into data extraction forms and the level of evidence was assessed. DATA SYNTHESIS: Results were standardized for each outcome measure by calculating a standardized mean difference (effect size). CONCLUSION: Effect sizes could not be pooled because of the heterogeneity of the studies. Therefore, we presented the results qualitatively. Although the level of evidence was low, the advantages of bilateral cochlear implants corresponded with the primary benefits of bilateral hearing, that is, improved speech perception in quiet and noise. Localization results were less consistent. No data on audiologic, speech production, or educational outcomes were available.