Single-sided Deafness Patients Research Articles

Auditory Rehabilitation in Single-Sided-Deafened Patients after Surgery to the Cerebellopontine Angle for Vestibular Schwannoma: What Is the Patient’s Choice?

Background: Surgical resection of vestibular schwannomas (VS) can be responsible for single-sided deafness (SSD). Hearing restoration can be a challenge both for the otolaryngologist and the patient. Patients and Methods: In a retrospective series, we analyzed the charts of SSD patients operated on for VS from 2005–2021, checking which type of hearing rehabilitation was chosen. All patients who wanted a hearing restoration underwent a hearing in noise test (HINT) in a stereo auditorium with and without a bone-anchored hearing device (BAHD) worn with a headband on the deaf side. Then, they had a preimplantation one-month trial with the BAHD at home vs. contralateral routing of signal (CROS) or BiCROS (with contralateral signal amplification) hearing aids (HAs). Results: Among 52 charts of the included adult SSD patients, only 29 (56%) eventually chose a hearing rehabilitation device (14 BAHD). Only one BAHD patient required a device explantation for skin complications, but then asked for reimplantation. Another one swapped the BAHD for HAs 2.5 years after. Two patients only occasionally used their BAHD with a headband. Nine patients preferred HAs, mainly BiCROS. Their contralateral hearing was significantly less than BAHD patients (p < 0.05), and only three used their HAs every day. Conclusions: Hearing rehabilitation in SSD patients after VS surgical resection is chosen in about 50% of cases. In complement of HINT, a real-life comparative hearing trial helps patients chose the best device, with good long-term results when a BAHD is chosen. HAs are preferred when contralateral hearing is altered but are not always worn.

Do Otologists and Other Otolaryngologists Manage Single-Sided Deafness Differently?

The aim of this study was to survey the knowledge and treatment management practices for single-sided deafness (SSD) among different subspecialties of otolaryngology. A questionnaire was sent via Google Sheets to members of the Turkish and Egyptian Otorhinolaryngology Societies between December 2021 and February 2022. For the statistical analysis, the respondents were divided into 3 groups as otologists, non-otologists, and residents at the department of otolaryngology-head and neck department. There were no statistically significant differences between otologists and non-otologists in radiological imaging (child P = .469, adult P = .140) and preferred treatment method (child P = .546, adult P = .106). However, otolaryngologists showed significant differences in radiological evaluation (P <.001), vestibular evaluation (P = .000), and frequency of treatment options recommended for pediatric and adult SSD patients (P = .000). There were no significant differences in SSD diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitation between otologists and non-otologists. However, when comparing pediatric and adult patients, there was a difference in the treatment management of SSD patients.

Tinnitus reduction in patients with single-sided deafness: the effect of cochlear implantation, bone conduction devices, and contralateral routing of sound hearing aids investigated in a randomized controlled trial.

Single-sided deafness (SSD) is often accompanied by tinnitus, resulting in a decreased quality of life. Currently, there is a lack of high level of evidence studies comparing different treatment options for SSD regarding tinnitus reduction. This randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluated the effect of a cochlear implant (CI), bone conduction device (BCD), contralateral routing of sound (CROS), and no treatment on tinnitus outcomes in SSD patients, with follow-up extending to 24 months. A total of 120 adult SSD patients were randomized to three groups: CI, a trial period with first a BCD on a headband, then a CROS, or vice versa. After the trial periods, patients opted for a BCD, CROS, or no treatment. At the start of follow-up, 28 patients were implanted with a CI, 25 patients with a BCD, 34 patients had a CROS, and 26 patients chose no treatment. The Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI), Tinnitus Questionnaire (TQ), the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) were completed at baseline and at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months of follow-up. The CI and BCD groups showed significantly decreased tinnitus impact scores. The CI group showed the largest decrease, which was already observed at 3 months of follow-up. Compared to the baseline, the median THI score decreased by 23 points, the TQ score by 17 points, and the VAS score by 60 points at 24 months. In the BCD group, the TQ score decreased by 9 points, and the VAS decreased by 25 points at 24 months. The HADS anxiety and depression subscale showed no indication for anxiety or depression at baseline, nor at 24 months, for all groups. In this RCT, SSD patients treated with a CI or BCD showed an overall decrease in tinnitus impact scores up to 24 months compared to baseline. The CI group reported a stable and the largest reduction. Cochlear implants appear to be superior to BCD and CROS, and no treatment for achieving partial or complete resolution of tinnitus in patients with SSD. Netherlands Trial Register, www.onderzoekmetmensen.nl/nl/trial/26952, NTR4457, CINGLE trial.

Tinnitus reduction after active bone-conduction implantation in patients with single-sided deafness: a prospective multicenter study.

Single-sided deafness (SSD) presents significant challenges for patients, including compromised sound localization, reduced speech recognition, and often, tinnitus. These issues are typically addressed using interventions such as cochlear implantation (CI) and bone conduction implant (BCI). However, evidence regarding the efficacy of BCI in reducing tinnitus in SSD patients remains limited. This study explored the ability of a novel active transcutaneous BCI (Bonebridge BCI602) to alleviate tinnitus in SSD patients. Prospective cohort multicenter study. Tertiary referral hospitals. A prospective multicenter study of 30 SSD patients was conducted. The patients were divided into two groups: those with (n = 19) and without (n = 11) tinnitus. Audiometric assessments, subjective questionnaires including the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) and the Bern Benefit in Single-Sided Deafness (BBSS), and tinnitus evaluations with the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI) and tinnitogram were conducted before and after BCI surgery. THI scores after surgery were significantly reduced in SSD patients with tinnitus. Subjective satisfaction improved in both the tinnitus and non-tinnitus groups; however, the former group exhibited a significantly greater improvement in the APHAB questionnaire score. According to tinnitograms, the loudness of tinnitus decreased, particularly in patients with ipsilateral tinnitus. Patients with residual hearing had greater reductions in their THI scores. However, three patients without residual hearing had a relative worsening of tinnitus after surgery. The Bonebridge BCI602 effectively reduced tinnitus in SSD patients, particularly in those with residual hearing. Subjective satisfaction improved in both the tinnitus and non-tinnitus groups. These findings demonstrate the therapeutic potential of BCI for managing SSD and associated tinnitus.

Effects of cochlear implantation on tinnitus in patients with single-sided deafness and asymmetrical hearing loss

Objective:To evaluate the effects of cochlear implantation in patients with single-sided deafness（SSD） and asymmetrical hearing loss（AHL）. Methods:Seventeen Mandarin-speaking CI patients diagnosed as SSD/AHL were recruited in our study. The Tinnitus Handicap Inventory（THI） and the Visual Analogue Scale（VAS） were used to assess changes in tinnitus distress and tinnitus loudness in SSD patients at each time point（pre-operation and post-operation）. Results:The THI score and all 3 dimensions were significant decreased with CI-on than pre-operation（P<0.05）. Tinnitus VAS scores were also decreased, and VAS scores were lower with CI-on than with CI-off, and were both significantly different at each time point after CI switch-on（P<0.05）. Conclusion:CI could help SSD/AHL patients to suppress tinnitus and reduce the loudness of tinnitus. However, CI should not be a treatment of tinnitus.

Analysis of one-year outcomes after cochlear implantation in adults with single-sided deafness

Objectives: To investigate the outcomes of cochlear implantation in Mandarin-speaking cochlear implant (CI) users with single-sided deafness (SSD). Methods: This study was a single-center prospective cohort study. Eleven Mandarin-speaking adult SSD patients who underwent CI implantation at Capital Medical University Beijing Tongren Hospital from August 2020 to October 2021 were recruited, including 6 males and 5 females, with the age ranging from 24 to 50 years old. In a sound field with 7 loudspeakers distributed at 180°, we measured root-mean-square error(RMSE)in SSD patients at the preoperative, 1-month, 3-month, 6-month, and 12-month after switch-on to assess the improvement of sound source localization. The Mandarin Speech Perception (MSP) was used in the sound field to test the speech reception threshold (SRT) of SSD patients under different signal-to-noise locations in a steady-state noise under conditions of CI off and CI on, to reflect the head shadow effect(SSSDNNH), binaural summation effect(S0N0) and squelch effect(S0NSSD). The Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI) and the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) were used to assess changes in tinnitus severity and tinnitus loudness in SSD patients at each time point. The Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale(SSQ) and the Nijmegen Cochlear Implantation Scale (NCIQ) were used to assess the subjective benefits of spatial speech perception and quality of life in SSD patients after cochlear implantation. SPSS 19.0 software was used for statistical analysis. Results: SSD patients showed a significant improvement in the poorer ear in hearing thresholds with CI-on compared with CI-off; The ability to localize the sound source was significantly improved, with statistically significant differences in RMSE at each follow-up time compared with the preoperative period (P<0.05). In the SSSDNNH condition, which reflects the head shadow effect, the SRT in binaural hearing was significantly improved by 6.5 dB compared with unaided condition, and the difference was statistically significant (t=6.25, P=0.001). However, there was no significant improvement in SRT between the binaural hearing condition and unaided conditions in the S0N0 and S0NSSD conditions (P>0.05). The total score of THI and three dimensions were significant decreased (P<0.05). Tinnitus VAS scores were significantly lower in binaural hearing compared to the unaided condition (P<0.001). The total score of SSQ, and the scores of speech and spatial dimensions were significant improved in binaural hearing compared to the unaided condition (P<0.001). There was no statistical difference in NCIQ questionnaire scores between preoperative and postoperative (P>0.05), and only the self-efficacy subscore showed a significant increase(Z=-2.497,P=0.013). Conclusion: CI could help Mandarin-speaking SSD patients restore binaural hearing to some extent, improve sound localization and speech recognition in noise. In addition, CI in SSD patients could suppress tinnitus, reduce the loudness of tinnitus, and improve subjective perceptions of spatial hearing and quality of life.

A Randomized Crossover Study in Single-Sided Deafness Comparing a Cartilage Conduction CROS System and an Air-Conduction CROS System.

To investigate if cartilage conduction (CC) rerouting devices are noninferior to air-conduction (AC) rerouting devices for single-sided deafness (SSD) patients by measuring objective and subjective performance using speech-in-noise tests that resemble a realistic hearing environment, sound localization tests, and standardized questionnaires. Prospective, single-subject randomized, crossover study. Anechoic room inside a university. Nine adults between 21 and 58 years of age with severe or profound unilateral sensorineural hearing loss. Patients' baseline hearing was assessed; they then used both the cartilage conduction contralateral routing of signals device (CC-CROS) and an air-conduction CROS hearing aid (AC-CROS). Patients wore each device for 2 weeks in a randomly assigned order. Three main outcome measures were 1) speech-in-noise tests, measuring speech reception thresholds; 2) proportion of correct sound localization responses; and 3) scores on the questionnaires, "Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit" (APHAB) and "Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale" with 12 questions (SSQ-12). Speech reception threshold improved significantly when noise was ambient, and speech was presented from the front or the poor-ear side with both CC-CROS and AC-CROS. When speech was delivered from the better-ear side, AC-CROS significantly improved performance, whereas CC-CROS had no significant effect. Both devices mainly worsened sound localization, whereas the APHAB and SSQ-12 scores showed benefits. CC-CROS has noninferior hearing-in-noise performance except when the speech was presented to the better ear under ambient noise. Subjective measures showed that the patients realized the effectiveness of both devices.

Sound Localization in Single-Sided Deafness; Outcomes of a Randomized Controlled Trial on the Comparison Between Cochlear Implantation, Bone Conduction Devices, and Contralateral Routing of Signals Hearing Aids.

There is currently a lack of prospective studies comparing multiple treatment options for single-sided deafness (SSD) in terms of long-term sound localization outcomes. This randomized controlled trial (RCT) aims to compare the objective and subjective sound localization abilities of SSD patients treated with a cochlear implant (CI), a bone conduction device (BCD), a contralateral routing of signals (CROS) hearing aid, or no treatment after two years of follow-up. About 120 eligible patients were randomized to cochlear implantation or to a trial period with first a BCD on a headband, then a CROS (or vice versa). After the trial periods, participants opted for a surgically implanted BCD, a CROS, or no treatment. Sound localization accuracy (in three configurations, calculated as percentage correct and root-mean squared error in degrees) and subjective spatial hearing (subscale of the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of hearing (SSQ) questionnaire) were assessed at baseline and after 24 months of follow-up. At the start of follow-up, 28 participants were implanted with a CI, 25 with a BCD, 34 chose a CROS, and 26 opted for no treatment. Participants in the CI group showed better sound localization accuracy and subjective spatial hearing compared to participants in the BCD, CROS, and no-treatment groups at 24 months. Participants in the CI and CROS groups showed improved subjective spatial hearing at 24 months compared to baseline. To conclude, CI outperformed the BCD, CROS, and no-treatment groups in terms of sound localization accuracy and subjective spatial hearing in SSD patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION Netherlands Trial Register (https://onderzoekmetmensen.nl): NL4457, CINGLE trial.

Auditory Cortical Plasticity in Patients with Single-Sided Deafness Before and After Cochlear Implantation

PurposeThis study investigated neuroplastic changes induced by postlingual single-sided deafness (SSD) and the effects of a cochlear implantation for the deaf ear. Neural processing of acoustic signals from the normal hearing ear to the brain was studied before and after implantation using a positron emission tomography (PET)/CT scanner.MethodsEight patients with postlingual SSD received a cochlear implant (CI) in a prospective clinical trial. Dynamic imaging was performed in a PET/CT scanner using radioactively labeled water ([15O]H2O) to localize changes in the regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF) with and without an auditory task of logatomes containing speech-like elements without meaningful context. The normal hearing ear was stimulated before implantation and after the use of the cochlear implant for at least 8 months (mean 13.5, range 8.1–26.6). Eight age- and gender-matched subjects with normal hearing on both sides served as healthy control subjects (HCS).ResultsWhen the normal hearing ear of SSD patients was stimulated before CI implantation, the [15O]H2O-PET showed a more symmetrical rCBF in the auditory regions of both hemispheres in comparison to the HCS. The use of CI increased the asymmetry index (AI) in six of eight patients indicating an increase of activity of the contralateral hemisphere. Non-parametric statistics revealed a significant difference in the AI between patients before CI implantation and HCS (p < .01), which disappeared after CI implantation (p = .195).ConclusionThe functional neuroimaging data showed a tendency towards normalization of neuronal activity after CI implantation, which supports the effectiveness of CI in SSD patients.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01749592, December 13, 2012.

Cochlear Implantation in Children Affected by Single-Sided Deafness: A Comprehensive Review.

Children with single-sided deafness (SSD) may experience delays in language and speech development. Reduced speech discrimination and poor sound localization abilities in young SSD patients may result in greater cognitive efforts required to focus and process auditory information, as well as increased listening-related fatigue. Consequently, these children can have a higher risk of academic failure and are often in need of extra help at school. Recently, cochlear implants (CIs) have been introduced as a rehabilitative option for these children, but their effectiveness is still a topic of debate. A literature review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines, searching the Medline database from inception to October 2023. The research identified nine papers that met the inclusion criteria. Data extracted from the selected studies included 311 children affected by SSD and cochlear implants. The reported audiological outcomes were further analyzed. Overall, a high level of satisfaction was described by parents of children with SSD and CI, and those who received a CI under the age of 3 presented better results. However, a proportion of patients did not use the device daily. Our review highlights the possible, and still controversial, role of CI for the hearing rehabilitation of children with unilateral deafness, underlining the need for further research in this field. To date, careful and comprehensive counseling with the child and the family is necessary before considering this option.

Auditory capacity of the better-hearing ear in asymmetric hearing loss

PurposeOur aim was to investigate the course of the hearing capacity of the better-hearing ear in single-sided deafness (SSD) and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL) over time, in a multicenter study.MethodsWe included 2086 pure-tone audiograms from 323 patients with SSD and AHL from four hospitals and 156 private practice otorhinolaryngologists. We collected: age, gender, etiology, duration of deafness, treatment with CI, number and monosyllabic speech recognition, numerical rating scale (NRS) of tinnitus intensity, and the tinnitus questionnaire according to Goebel and Hiller. We compared the pure tone audiogram of the better-hearing ear in patients with SSD with age- and gender-controlled hearing thresholds from ISO 7029:2017.ResultsFirst, individuals with SSD showed a significantly higher hearing threshold from 0.125 to 8 kHz in the better-hearing ear compared to the ISO 7029:2017. The duration of deafness of the poorer-hearing ear showed no relationship with the hearing threshold of the better-hearing ear. The hearing threshold was significantly higher in typically bilaterally presenting etiologies (chronic otitis media, otosclerosis, and congenital hearing loss), except for Menière’s disease. Second, subjects that developed AHL did so in 5.19 ± 5.91 years and showed significant reduction in monosyllabic word and number recognition.ConclusionsIndividuals with SSD show significantly poorer hearing in the better-hearing ear than individuals with NH from the ISO 7029:2017. In clinical practice, we should, therefore, inform our SSD patients that their disease is accompanied by a reduced hearing capacity on the contralateral side, especially in certain etiologies.

Cochlear implantation in unilateral hearing loss: impact of short- to medium-term auditory deprivation.

Single sided deafness (SSD) results in profound cortical reorganization that presents clinically with a significant impact on sound localization and speech comprehension. Cochlear implantation (CI) has been approved for two manufacturers' devices in the United States to restore bilateral function in SSD patients with up to 10 years of auditory deprivation. However, there is great variability in auditory performance and it remains unclear how auditory deprivation affects CI benefits within this 10-year window. This prospective study explores how measured auditory performance relates to real-world experience and device use in a cohort of SSD-CI subjects who have between 0 and 10 years of auditory deprivation. Subjects were assessed before implantation and 3-, 6-, and 12-months post-CI activation via Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant (CNC) word recognition and Arizona Biomedical Institute (AzBio) sentence recognition in varying spatial speech and noise presentations that simulate head shadow, squelch, and summation effects (S0N0, SSSDNNH, SNHNSSD; 0 = front, SSD = impacted ear, NH = normal hearing ear). Patient-centered assessments were performed using Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI), Spatial Hearing Questionnaire (SHQ), and Health Utility Index Mark 3 (HUI3). Device use data was acquired from manufacturer software. Further subgroup analysis was performed on data stratified by <5 years and 5-10 years duration of deafness. In the SSD ear, median (IQR) CNC word scores pre-implant and at 3-, 6-, and 12-months post-implant were 0% (0-0%), 24% (8-44%), 28% (4-44%), and 18% (7-33%), respectively. At 6 months post-activation, AzBio scores in S0N0 and SSSDNNH configurations (n = 25) demonstrated statistically significant increases in performance by 5% (p = 0.03) and 20% (p = 0.005), respectively. The median HUI3 score was 0.56 pre-implant, lower than scores for common conditions such as anxiety (0.68) and diabetes (0.77), and comparable to stroke (0.58). Scores improved to 0.83 (0.71-0.91) by 3 months post-activation. These audiologic and subjective benefits were observed even in patients with longer durations of deafness. By merging CI-associated changes in objective and patient-centered measures of auditory function, our findings implicate central mechanisms of auditory compensation and adaptation critical in auditory performance after SSD-CI and quantify the extent to which they affect the real-world experience reported by individuals.

Clinical characteristics and prognosis of sudden sensorineural hearing loss in single-sided deafness patients.

Sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL) in patients with single-sided deafness (SSD) is rare. The prognosis of the sole serviceable hearing ear is very important for these patients. However, the clinical characteristics and prognosis of SSNHL in SSD patients are not well-documented. This study aimed to investigate the clinical features and treatment outcomes of SSNHL in SSD patients. Clinical data of 36 SSD patients and 116 non-SSD patients with unilateral SSNHL from January 2013 to December 2022 were retrospectively investigated. The clinical characteristics of the SSD patients were analyzed. All SSD patients were treated with intratympanic steroids plus intravenous steroids. Pure-tone average (PTA) and word recognition score (WRS) before and after treatment were recorded. The hearing recovery of SSNHL in SSD patients in comparison with non-SSD patients was explored. Auditory outcomes in SSD patients with different etiologies were also compared. Initial hearing threshold showed no significant differences between the SSD group and the non-SSD group (66.41 ± 24.64 dB HL vs. 69.21 ± 31.48 dB HL, p = 0.625). The SSD group had a higher post-treatment hearing threshold (median (interquartile range, IQR) 53.13(36.56) dB HL) than the non-SSD group (median 32.50(47.5) dB HL, p < 0.01). Hearing gains (median 8.75(13.00) dB) and the rate of significant recovery (13.89%) were lower in the SSD group than in the non-SSD group (median 23.75(34.69) dB, 45.69%). The etiology of SSD was classified as SSNHL, special types of infection, chronic otitis media, and unknown causes. SSNHL accounted for the maximum proportion (38.9%) of causes of SSD in the SSD group. Hearing gains were lower in the SSNHL-SSD group than in other causes of the SSD group. A binary logistic regression analysis demonstrated that SSD serves as an indicator of unfavorable hearing recovery outcomes (OR = 5.264, p < 0.01). The prognosis of SSNHL in SSD patients is unsatisfactory. SSNHL accounts for the maximum proportion of causes of SSD in this group of patients. For SSD patients caused by SSNHL, less hearing improvement after treatment was expected when SSNHL occurred in the contralateral ear in comparison with SSD patients with other causes.

Hearing Rehabilitation Using Bone Conduction Implants in Patients With Single-Sided Deafness After Vestibular Schwannoma Removal

Background and Objectives Vestibular schwannoma (VS) itself or treatment of VS can cause single-sided deafness (SSD), a unilateral sensorineural hearing loss. Patients of SSD experience communication problems, which can be frustrating. For decades, many types of bone conduction implants (BCIs) have been developed and used to treat such hearing problems. In this study, we evaluated the effectiveness of BAHD surgery to treat SSD patients’ hearing impairment and analysed the complications patients suffer.Subjects and Method A retrospective chart review was conducted on 12 patients who had undergone BCIs, such as Baha Attract, Bonebridge, and Sophono implantation, after removal of VS. From 2016 to 2021, one senior surgeon at a single tertiary hospital performed surgery for SSD rehabilitation. The authors analysed the clinical features, radiologic findings (CT and MRI), hearing tests (pure tone audiogram [PTA], speech audiogram [SA], and Korea hearing in noise test), subjective satisfaction scores (abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit), and surgical outcomes of the patients.Results All patients underwent temporal MRI, temporal bone CT scan, PTA, and SA at least 3 years after VS removal and confirmed no residual tumour or serviceable contralateral hearing at the last follow-up. Among the patients (12), eight received Baha Attract implantation, three received Bonebridge implantation, and one received Sophono implantation. On the average, patients’ ipsilateral hearing outcomes improved by 82.7 dB (from 115.8±9.8 dB to 33.1±9.5 dB).Conclusion There are many methods of hearing rehabilitation in SSD that are used after VS, but BCI seemed to be the most useful treatment.

Prospective comparative analysis of cochlear implant patients with single-sided deafness and asymmetric hearing loss with regard to health-related quality of life, tinnitus distress and psychological comorbidities

Patients with single-sided deafness (SSD) and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL) are increasingly being treated with cochlear implants (CI) due to the demonstrated improvements in auditory abilities and quality of life. To date, there are few published studies in which these two groups are comparatively studied. The aim of the current study was to examine which factors differ between those two patient groups, especially preoperatively. Asecondary analysis of the previously published raw data of 66prospectively recruited CI patients (21SSD/45AHL) was performed. In addition to the hearing outcome, tinnitus distress (tinnitus questionnaire), health-related quality of life (Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire, NCIQ), stress (Perceived Stress Questionnaire, PSQ), and psychological comorbidities (General Depression Scale, ADS‑L and Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale, GAD-7) were assessed in SSD and AHL patients pre- and postoperatively. Preoperatively, SSD patients showed significantly higher scores in the NCIQ subdomains "elementary" and "advanced sound perception" than the AHL group. Stress (PSQ) and anxiety symptoms (GAD-7) were significantly higher preoperatively in SSD patients than in AHL patients. After CI, these differences were strongly reduced, with minimal differences being detectable between the groups in the investigated domains postoperatively. SSD and AHL patients differ significantly preoperatively in terms of their subjective hearing assessment and psychosocial parameters. In SSD patients, psychological stress factors may have astronger impact on the quality of life than in AHL patients. These aspects should be taken into account in the preoperative counseling and postoperative rehabilitation.

Clinical performance, audiological outcomes, and quality of life of the Cochlear Osia ® system

ObjectiveThe Cochlear Osseointegrated Steady-State Implant Bone Anchored Hearing Device (Osia) is a surgically implanted titanium apparatus that utilizes a piezoelectric actuator under the skin to address conductive and mixed hearing loss as well as single-sided deafness. The purpose of this study is to examine the clinical, audiologic, and quality-of-life outcomes in patients who underwent Osia implantation. MethodsThis is a retrospective study analyzing 30 adult patients (age 27–86) with conductive healing loss (CHL), mixed hearing loss (MHL), or single-sided deafness (SSD) who were implanted with the Osia device from January 2020 to April 2023 at a single institution by the senior author. Preoperative speech score testing (CNC, AzBio in quiet, AzBio in noise) were performed in all subjects while unaided, wearing conventional air conduction hearing aids, and wearing a softband BAHA. These preoperative speech scores were then compared to post-implantation speech scores using paired t-test analysis to assess for degree of speech improvement. In order to analyze quality of life after Osia implantation, each patient filled out the Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) survey. The GBI is a series of 18 questions answered using a five-point Likert scale that addresses the changes in general health status, physical health status, psychosocial health status, and social support after a medical intervention. ResultsCHL, MHL, and SSD patients had significant improvement in hearing and speech recognition scores after Osia implantation compared to preoperative unaided hearing: CNC (14 % vs 80 %, p < 0.0001), AzBio in Quiet (26 % vs 94 %, p < 0.0001), and AzBio in Noise (36 % vs 87 %, p = 0.0001). Preoperative speech scores using the softband BAHA were accurate predictors of post-implantation speech scores and can serve to determine surgical candidacy for the Osia. Post-implantation Glasgow Benefit Inventory patient surveys demonstrated significant improvement in quality of life with patients scoring an average increase of +54.1 points in heath satisfaction. ConclusionAdult patients with CHL, MHL, and SSD can receive significant improvement in speech recognition scores after implantation with the Osia device. This translates to improved quality of life, which was confirmed on the post-implantation Glasgow Benefit Inventory patient surveys.

Cochlear Implantation in Very Young Children With Single-Sided Deafness.

Cochlear implants (CIs) for single-sided deafness (SSD) have only been approved for patients 5 years and older despite data supporting that younger children can also benefit from implantation. This study describes our institution's experience with CI for SSD in children 5 years and younger. Case series with chart review. Tertiary referral center. A case series with chart review identified 19 patients up to age 5 years who underwent CI for SSD between 2014 and 2022. Baseline characteristics, perioperative complications, device usage, and speech outcomes were collected. The median age at CI was 2.8 (range, 1.0-5.4) years, with 15 (79%) patients being below age 5 at implantation. Etiologies of hearing loss were idiopathic (n = 8), cytomegalovirus (n = 4), enlarged vestibular aqueduct (n = 3), hypoplastic cochlear nerve (n = 3), and meningitis (n = 1). The median preoperative pure-tone average was 90 (range, 75-120) and 20 (range, 5-35) dB eHL in the poorand better hearing ears, respectively. No patients had postoperative complications. Twelve patients achieved consistent device use (average, 9 h/d). Three of the seven who were not consistent users had hypoplastic cochlear nerves and/or developmental delays. The three patients with available preoperative and postoperative speech testing showed significant benefits, and five patients with available postoperative testing demonstrated speech recognition in the implanted ear when isolated from the better ear. CI can safely be performed in younger children with SSD. Patients and families accept early implantation, as evidenced by consistent device use, and derive notable benefits in speech recognition. Candidacy can be broadened to include SSD patients under age five years, particularly individuals without hypoplastic cochlear nerves or developmental delay.

Matching the pitch perception of the cochlear implanted ear with the contralateral ear in patients with single-sided deafness: a novel approach.

Single-sided deaf patients following cochlear implantation often compare the sound quality of their implanted ear with normal hearing. The interaural differences can result in dissatisfaction with speech comprehension and reduced time of usage of the speech processor; hence, prolonging auditory adaptation time. The proposed calibration method presented in this study demonstrates how the frequency distribution of the cochlear implant can be set to adequately approximate the pitch perception of the contralateral normal hearing ear towards improving speech intelligibility in a noisy environment. In 12 postlingual single-sided deaf patients, subjective interaural pitch-matching was carried out to determine new central frequencies for the reallocation of the frequency bands of their speech processor (CP910, CP950 or CP1000, Cochlear, Australia). The patients were asked to compare the pitch of the tones presented to their normal hearing ear to the pitch of individual channels of their cochlear implant (CI522 or CI622, Cochlear, Australia). A third-degree polynomial curve was fit to the acquired matching frequencies to create the new frequency allocation table. Audiological measurements (free-field aided thresholds, speech reception thresholds, and monosyllabic word recognition score) in noise, together with a Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ12) questionnaire (short version of the original SSQ) results were evaluated prior to the pitch-matching procedure, and again, 2 weeks later. The free-field aided thresholds of the patients showed no greater shift than ± 5dB following the procedure; however, their monosyllabic word recognition score in noise improved significantly (mean - 9.58%, SD 4.98%, matched pairs t test comparison: p < 0.001). The results of the SSQ12 questionnaire also showed significant improvement in speech intelligibility, sound localization, and sound quality (mean 0.96 points, SD 0.45 points, matched pairs t test comparison: p < 0.001). Matching the pitch perception of the implanted cochlea with the sensation of the normal hearing contralateral ear, resulted in significant changes in the quality of hearing in patients with single-sided deafness. It is plausible the procedure can usher positive results in bimodal patients or following sequential bilateral cochlear implantation.

Feasibility of Virtual Reality-Based Auditory Localization Training With Binaurally Recorded Auditory Stimuli for Patients With Single-Sided Deafness.

To train participants to localize sound using virtual reality (VR) technology, appropriate auditory stimuli that contain accurate spatial cues are essential. The generic head-related transfer function that grounds the programmed spatial audio in VR does not reflect individual variation in monaural spatial cues, which is critical for auditory spatial perception in patients with single-sided deafness (SSD). As binaural difference cues are unavailable, auditory spatial perception is a typical problem in the SSD population and warrants intervention. This study assessed the applicability of binaurally recorded auditory stimuli in VR-based training for sound localization in SSD patients. Sixteen subjects with SSD and 38 normal-hearing (NH) controls underwent VR-based training for sound localization and were assessed 3 weeks after completing training. The VR program incorporated prerecorded auditory stimuli created individually in the SSD group and over an anthropometric model in the NH group. Sound localization performance revealed significant improvements in both groups after training, with retained benefits lasting for an additional 3 weeks. Subjective improvements in spatial hearing were confirmed in the SSD group. By examining individuals with SSD and NH, VR-based training for sound localization that used binaurally recorded stimuli, measured individually, was found to be effective and beneficial. Furthermore, VR-based training does not require sophisticated instruments or setups. These. suggest that this technique represents a new therapeutic treatment for impaired sound localization.

Speech Perception in Noise and Sound Localization for Cochlear Implant With Single-Sided Deafness Compared With Contralateral Routing of Signal Hearing Aids.

Cochlear implantation (CI) for the treatment of single-sided deafness (SSD) is a relatively new treatment modality. Although comparing the effectiveness of CI and contralateral routing of signal (CROS) hearing aids (HAs) is important, very few reports on this topic exist. In this study, objective assessments and subjective assessments were conducted to determine which SSD individuals would prefer CI or CROS HAs. Objective assessments (speech perception and sound localization) and subjective assessments (Hearing Handicap Inventory for Adults (HHIA), Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB), MOS Short-Form 36-Item Health Survey version 2 (SF-36v2)) were performed on 87 SSD patients. Of the 87 SSD patients, 33 patients hoped for CROS HAs, and 17 patients hoped for CI. The CI group underwent subjective and objective assessments at 6 and 12 months postoperatively. The CROS HAs group underwent objective assessments at 1 month after wearing CROS HAs. After the intervention, the localization ability was significantly improved in the CI group (p < 0.05) with no significant improvement in that of the CROS HAs group (p = 0.48). No significant improvement in speech perception in noise was observed in the CROS (Signal-to-Noise ratio + 10, p = 0.08; SN + 0, p = 0.17); however, a significant improvement in the CI group was observed at 12 months postoperatively. The APHAB subscale "background noise" and SF-36v2 health concepts of role-physical, general health, vitality, role-emotional, and mental health were significantly higher in the CI group. CI was superior to CROS HAs in speech perception in terms of noise and sound localization. Patients with postlingual acute-onset hearing loss and more handicaps and a more positive view of their hearing loss possibly tend to choose CI.