Predicting Matrix test effectiveness for evaluating auditory performance in noise using pure-tone audiometry and speech recognition in quiet in cochlear implant recipients.

INTRODUCTION: Auditory performance in noise of cochlear implant recipients can be assessed with the adaptive Matrix test (MT); however, when the speech-to-noise ratio (SNR) exceeds 15 dB, the background noise has any negative impact on the speech recognition. Here, we aim to evaluate the predictive power of aided pure-tone audiometry and speech recognition in quiet, and establish cut-off values for both tests that indicate whether auditory performance in noise can be assessed using the Matrix sentence test in a diffuse noise environment. METHODS: Here, we assessed the power of pure-tone audiometry and speech recognition in quiet to predict the response to the MT. Ninety-eight cochlear implant recipients were assessed using different sound processors from Advanced Bionics (n=56) and Cochlear (n=42). Auditory tests were performed at least 1-year after cochlear implantation or upgrading the sound processor to ensure the best benefit of the implant. Auditory assessment of the implanted ear in free-field conditions included: pure-tone average (PTA), speech discrimination score (SDS) in quiet at 65 dB, and speech recognition threshold (SRT) in noise that is the SNR at which the patient can correctly recognize 50% of the words using the MT in a diffuse sound field. RESULTS: The SRT in noise was determined in sixty patients (61%) and undetermined in 38 (39%) using the MT. When cut-off values for PTA <36 dB and SDS >41% were used separately, they were able to predict a positive response to the MT in 83% of recipients; using both cut-off values together, the predictive value reached 92%. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: As the pure-tone audiometry is standardized universally and the speech recognition in quiet could vary depending on the language used; we propose that the MT should be performed in recipients with PTA <36 dB, and in recipients with PTA >36 dB, a list of Matrix sentences at a fixed SNR should be presented to determine the percentage of words understood. This approach should enable clinicians to obtain information about auditory performance in noise whenever possible.

Long-term outcomes of retrospective case series of middle ear implantation with Vibrant Soundbridge in children with congenital aural atresia.

PURPOSE: to assess audiological performance in quiet and noise, quality of life and side effects of Vibrant Soundbridge (VSB) in children with congenital aural atresia (CAA). METHODS: A retrospective study including consecutive patients with unilateral or bilateral CAA implanted with VSB from 2009 to 2020 in a tertiary referral centre. RESULTS: 18 patients with CAA and a present stapes were included (3 simultaneous bilateral VSB implants) and 21 ears: 17 VSB were attached to the short incus process, and four to the stapes. Age at implantation ranged from 4.7 to 15.8 years. Average follow-up was 6.5 years (± 3.7 years). In unilateral VSB, air conduction pure tone average (ACPTA) thresholds increased from 75.3 ± 15.2 to 32.6 ± 8.3 dB post-operatively (VSB activated) (n = 15; p < 0.01). The speech reception threshold (SRT) and the word recognition score (WRS) were significantly improved from 81.5 ± 10.4 to 43.9 ± 7.6 dB and 0% to 84.8 ± 8.5% postoperatively (n = 15; p < 0.01). The signal to noise ratio (SNR) was significantly improved from 2.1 ± 2.9 dB VSB inactivated to 0.3 ± 2.7 dB VSB activated (n = 15; p < 0.01). There was no significant difference in performance according to floating mass transducer (FMT) placement. 5/15 children were non-users at last follow-up in unilateral VSB and 0/3 in bilateral. CONCLUSIONS: CAA ears with VSB activated had a significant improvement of ACPTA, WRS, SRT and SNR. A third of patients with unilateral CAA became non-users at last follow-up. The main challenge is to target the indications for the implantation of the VSB to avoid its discontinuation.

Treatment choice in single-sided deafness and asymmetric hearing loss. A prospective, multicentre cohort study on 155 patients.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the treatment choice in a cohort of subjects with single-sided deafness (SSD) and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL). To assess the reliability of the treatment trials. DESIGN: In this national, multicentre, prospective study, the choice of subjects was made after two consecutive trials of Contralateral Routing Of the Signal (CROS) hearing aids and a Bone Conduction Device (BCD) on a headband. Subjects could proceed with one of these two options, opt for cochlear implantation or decline all treatments. SETTING: Seven tertiary university hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred fifty-five subjects with SSD or AHL fulfilling the candidacy criteria for cochlear implantation, with or without associated tinnitus. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: After the two trials, the number of subjects choosing each option was described. Repeated assessments of both generic and auditory-specific quality of life were conducted, as well as hearing assessments (speech recognition in noise and horizontal localization). RESULTS: CROS was chosen by 75 subjects, followed by cochlear implantation (n = 51), BCD (n = 18) and abstention (n = 11). Patients who opted for cochlear implantation had a poorer quality of life (P = .03). The improvement of quality of life indices after each trial was significantly associated with the final treatment choice (P = .008 for generic indices, P = .002 for auditory-specific indices). The follow-up showed that this improvement had been overestimated in the CROS group, with a long-term retention rate of 52.5%. CONCLUSIONS: More than one third of SSD/AHL subjects are unsatisfied after CROS and BCD trials. Repeated quality of life assessments help counselling the patient for his/her treatment choice.

Benefits of a contralateral routing of signal device for unilateral Naída CI cochlear implant recipients.

PURPOSE: Many bilaterally deaf adults are only able to receive one cochlear implant (CI), resulting in suboptimal listening performance, especially in challenging listening environments. Adding a contralateral routing of signal (CROS) device to a unilateral CI is one possibility to alleviate these challenges. This study examined the benefit of such a CROS device. METHODS: Thirteen adult subjects with at least 6 months of CI use, and no or limited benefit of a hearing instrument in the contralateral ear were included in the study. The perceived benefit of a CROS device in everyday listening environments was evaluated up to 1 year after initial fitting using several questionnaires. Speech intelligibility performance was determined using the French matrix sentence test in quiet and in two speech-in-noise setups and was followed for 3 months after CROS fitting. RESULTS: Subjects indicated high satisfaction with the practical usability of the CROS device and long-term device retention was high. Perceived benefits in everyday listening environments were reported. Formal speech intelligibility tests revealed statistically significant median improvements of 6.93 dB SPL (Wilcoxon Z = 2.380, p = 0.017) in quiet and up to 8.00 dB SNR (Wilcoxon Z = 2.366, p = 0.018) in noise. These benefits were accessible immediately without a need for prolonged acclimatization. CONCLUSIONS: Subjective satisfaction and device retention as well as speech intelligibility benefits in quiet and in noise prove the CROS device to be a valuable addition to a unilateral CI in cases of bilateral deafness where bilateral implantation is not an option.

Benefit of the UltraZoom beamforming technology in noise in cochlear implant users.

The objectives of the study were to demonstrate the audiological and subjective benefits of the adaptive UltraZoom beamforming technology available in the Naída CI Q70 sound processor, in cochlear-implanted adults upgraded from a previous generation sound processor. Thirty-four adults aged between 21 and 89 years (mean 53 ± 19) were prospectively included. Nine subjects were unilaterally implanted, 11 bilaterally and 14 were bimodal users. The mean duration of cochlear implant use was 7 years (range 5-15 years). Subjects were tested in quiet with monosyllabic words and in noise with the adaptive French Matrix test in the best-aided conditions. The test setup contained a signal source in front of the subject and three noise sources at +/-90° and 180°. The noise was presented at a fixed level of 65 dB SPL and the level of speech signal was varied to obtain the speech reception threshold (SRT). During the upgrade visit, subjects were tested with the Harmony and with the Naída CI sound processors in omnidirectional microphone configuration. After a take-home phase of 2 months, tests were repeated with the Naída CI processor with and without UltraZoom. Subjective assessment of the sound quality in daily environments was recorded using the APHAB questionnaire. No difference in performance was observed in quiet between the two processors. The Matrix test in noise was possible in the 21 subjects with the better performance. No difference was observed between the two processors for performance in noise when using the omnidirectional microphone. At the follow-up session, the median SRT with the Naída CI processor with UltraZoom was -4 dB compared to -0.45 dB without UltraZoom. The use of UltraZoom improved the median SRT by 3.6 dB (p < 0.0001, Wilcoxon paired test). When looking at the APHAB outcome, improvement was observed for speech understanding in noisy environments (p < 0.01) and in aversive situations (p < 0.05) in the group of 21 subjects who were able to perform the Matrix test in noise and for speech understanding in noise (p < 0.05) in the group of 13 subjects with the poorest performance, who were not able to perform the Matrix test in noise. The use of UltraZoom beamforming technology, available on the new sound processor Naída CI, improves speech performance in difficult and realistic noisy conditions when the cochlear implant user needs to focus on the person speaking at the front. Using the APHAB questionnaire, a subjective benefit for listening in background noise was also observed in subjects with good performance as well as in those with poor performance. This study highlighted the importance of upgrading CI recipients to new technology and to include assessment in noise and subjective feedback evaluation as part of the process.

Audiological Results and Quality of Life of Sophono Alpha 2 Transcutaneous Bone-Anchored Implant Users in Single-Sided Deafness.

Single-sided deafness (SSD) represents one of the most difficult audiological conditions to rehabilitate. The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the audiological benefits and quality of life of patients affected by SSD who had previously been users of the Alpha 1® when upgrading them to the Sophono Alpha 2® external processor (Boulder, Colo., USA). Nine patients were included in the study. They underwent physical examination, free-field speech audiometry at 40 and 60 dB, a hearing-in-noise test (Hirsch's test and the squelch test), the Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) questionnaire, and a specific questionnaire on patient satisfaction with Alpha 1. Afterwards, the Alpha 2 external processor was delivered to all patients, and the above-mentioned protocol was repeated after 1 month with the Alpha 2. A statistically significant improvement was found in the speech discrimination score at 40 dB and in the squelch test when using the Alpha 2 external processor compared to the Alpha 1. Alpha 2 had a good clinical tolerance and gave similar results in the specific questionnaire and the GBI to Alpha 1. In conclusion, the new Alpha 2 external processor represents a safe and effective device for the rehabilitation of SSD, and there is an audiological benefit to upgrading to the Alpha 2 external processor for patients who had previously been users of the Alpha 1. The improvement in quality of life is similar to that with other bone-anchored hearing devices.