Combining acoustic and electrical hearing

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: The concept of combining electrical stimulation for high-frequency sound with acoustic hearing for low-frequency information was tested. In addition, whether residual hearing can be preserved when an electrode is placed into the inner ear up to 10 mm and whether place of electrical stimulation influences speech perception were tested. STUDY DESIGN: A single-subject clinical trial design was employed. METHODS: Six postlingual adults with severe high-frequency hearing impairment were recruited to participate in the study. A new six-channel cochlear implant was designed for the clinical trial. The intracochlear electrodes were either 6 or 10 mm in length based on a Nucleus CI-24 multichannel implant. Monosyllabic word understanding and consonant identification testing in a recorded sound-only condition were used to assess changes in speech perception. Follow-up was greater than 12 months. RESULTS: Acoustic hearing was preserved in all six subjects (n = 3, 6-mm electrodes; n = 3, 10-mm electrodes). Preoperative monosyllabic word and sentence scores were unchanged in all subjects following implantation. A 30% to 40% improvement in consonant recognition occurred with the 10-mm electrode. The subjects with 10-mm electrodes were able to understand 83% to 90% of the monosyllabic words using the implant plus binaural hearing aids. Scores were more than doubled when compared with preoperative scores with hearing aids only. CONCLUSION: The human ear has the capability to integrate both acoustic and high-frequency electrically processed speech information. Placement of a short, 10-mm electrode does not appear to damage residual low-frequency inner ear hair cell function, interfere with the micro mechanics of normal cochlear vibration, or decrease residual speech perception. The improvement in speech recognition was due primarily to the increased perception of higher-frequency consonantal speech cues, and this improvement took several months to become apparent. Such a device can provide a substantial benefit in speech understanding to individuals with severe high-frequency hearing loss, while still maintaining the benefits of the residual lower-frequency acoustic hearing. The position of the electrode and the place of frequency information within the cochlea were shown to be important factors in the success of such a device.     

Preservation of hearing in cochlear implant surgery: advantages of combined electrical and acoustical speech processing

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: This study documents the importance of preserving residual low-frequency acoustic hearing as those with more residual hearing are selected for cochlear implantation. Surgical strategies used for hearing preservation with a short hybrid cochlear implant are outlined. The benefits of preserved residual low-frequency hearing, improved word understanding in noise, and music appreciation are described. STUDY DESIGN: Multicenter, prospective, single-subject design. METHODS: Records were reviewed of 21 individuals participating in an Food and Drug Administration (FDA) feasibility clinical trial who have received an Iowa/Nucleus 10 mm electrode. A second group of subjects receiving implants at the University of Iowa that have used the 10 mm device between 2 years and 6 months were also reviewed. Outcome measures included standardized tests of monosyllabic word understanding, spondees in noise, and common melody recognition. RESULTS: Low-frequency hearing was maintained in all individuals immediately postoperative. One subject lost hearing at 2.5 months postoperative after a viral infection. The group has averaged a loss of -9 dB low-frequency acoustic hearing between 125 and 1,000 Hz. Monosyllabic word understanding scores at 6 months for a group being followed for an FDA clinical trial using the implant plus hearing aids was 69% correct. For the long-term group receiving implants at Iowa, monosyllabic word understanding in those who have used the device between 6 months and 2 years is 79%. Other important findings include improved recognition of speech in noise (9 dB improvement) as compared with standard cochlear implant recipients who were matched for speech recognition in quiet and near normal recognition of common melodies. CONCLUSION: The surgical strategies outlined have been successful in preservation of low-frequency hearing in 96% of individuals. Combined electrical and acoustical speech processing has enabled this group of volunteers to gain improved word understanding as compared with their preoperative hearing with bilateral hearing aids and a group of individuals receiving a standard cochlear implant with similar experience with their device. The improvement of speech in noise and melody recognition is attributed to the ability to distinguish fine pitch differences as the result of preserved residual low-frequency acoustic hearing. Preservation of low-frequency acoustic hearing is important for improving speech in noise and music appreciation for the hearing impaired, both of which are important in real-life situations.     

Acoustic plus electric speech processing: preliminary results of a multicenter clinical trial of the Iowa/Nucleus Hybrid implant

Aim: This communication details the latest preliminary results from an ongoing multicenter single-subject design clinical trial of the Iowa/Nucleus Hybrid 10-mm cochlear implant. Selection criteria, surgical strategies used for hearing preservation, and the benefits of preserved residual low-frequency hearing, improved word understanding in noise, and music appreciation are described. Patients and Methods: The device has been implanted in 48 individuals with residual low-frequency hearing. Results:Hearing preservation has been accomplished in 46/48 subjects. Acoustic speech perception has also been preserved. Combined acoustic plus electric speech processing has enabled most of this group of volunteers to gain improved word understanding as compared to their preoperative hearing with bilateral hearing aids. A subset of subjects with 12 months or more experience demonstrates CNC word understanding continues to improve more than 24 months after implantation. Improved word understanding in noise is also a benefit of acoustic plus electric speech processing. Conclusions:The improvement of speech in noise and melody recognition is linked to the ability to distinguish fine pitch differences as the result of preserved residual low-frequency acoustic hearing. Both of these measures are very important in real life to the hearing impaired. Preservation of residual low-frequency hearing should be considered when expanding candidate selection criteria for standard cochlear implants.     

Reimplantation of hybrid cochlear implant users with a full-length electrode after loss of residual hearing.

OBJECTIVE: To assess word recognition and pitch-scaling abilities of cochlear implant users first implanted with a Nucleus 10-mm Hybrid electrode array and then reimplanted with a full length Nucleus Freedom array after loss of residual hearing. BACKGROUND: Although electroacoustic stimulation is a promising treatment for patients with residual low-frequency hearing,a small subset of them lose that residual hearing. It is not clear whether these patients would be better served by leaving in the 10-mm array and providing electric stimulation through it, or by replacing it with a standard full-length array. METHODS: Word recognition and pitch-scaling abilities were measured in 2 users of hybrid cochlear implants who lost their residual hearing in the implanted ear after a few months. Tests were repeated over several months, first with a 10-mm array, and after, these patients were reimplanted with a full array. The word recognition task consisted of 2 50-word consonant nucleus consonant (CNC) lists. In the pitch-scaling task, 6 electrodes were stimulated in pseudorandom order, and patients assigned a pitch value to the sensation elicited by each electrode. RESULTS: Shortly after reimplantation with the full electrode array, speech understanding was much better than with the 10-mm array. Patients improved their ability to perform the pitch-scaling task over time with the full array, although their performance on that task was variable, and the improvements were often small. CONCLUSION: 1) Short electrode arrays may help preserve residual hearing but may also provide less benefit than traditional cochlear implants for some patients. 2) Pitch percepts in response to electric stimulation may be modified by experience.     

Combined electric and acoustic stimulation of the auditory system: results of a clinical study

Combined electric and acoustic stimulation (EAS) of the auditory system is a new therapy for patients with severe to profound high- and mid-frequency hearing loss but remaining low-frequency hearing. In a prospective study, 13 patients with low-frequency hearing of better than 60 dB below 1 kHz were implanted with a MED-EL COMBI 40+ cochlear implant. Pure tone thresholds as well as monosyllabic word scores and Hochmair-Schulz-Moser sentences in quiet and in noise were measured with hearing aids, cochlear implant alone and in the combined stimulation mode (EAS) in the same ear. Hearing could be partially preserved in 11 out of the 13 patients. All patients scored significantly higher with cochlear implant alone than with hearing aids. Seven patients scored higher in the EAS mode than with cochlear implant alone for sentences in noise, 4 remained unchanged, and 2 could not use EAS. Synergistic effects of EAS were most prominent for hearing in noise with increases of up to 72% as compared to cochlear implant alone.     

Comparison of two frequency-to-electrode maps for acoustic-electric stimulation

The fitting of a cochlear implant together with aided residual hearing was evaluated by means of matching frequency and/or perceived pitch between acoustic and electric modalities. Five cochlear implant users with the Nucleus^® Freedom? electrode array with residual acoustic hearing participated. Psychophysical procedures were used to create a map in which the implant was programmed to provide the listener with high-frequency information only above the frequency at which acoustic hearing was no longer considered useful. This was compared to a second map which provided the full frequency range. Listeners wore each map for a number of weeks before speech recognition was measured in quiet and noise. Post-operatively across subjects, average hearing thresholds worsened by 27 dB. However, cochlear implantation provided superior recognition of speech compared to pre-operative scores, with the best results found when subjects were wearing their hearing aids together with the implant. No significant differences were found between the two maps on speech tests when subjects were wearing their implant together with hearing aid/s. In conclusion, the combination of a cochlear implant together with hearing aid/s was effective at providing speech perception benefits for the listeners of the current study, regardless of the frequency-to-electrode allocation selected.     

Standard cochlear implantation of adults with residual low-frequency hearing: implications for combined electro-acoustic stimulation.

OBJECTIVE: This study compared preoperative and postoperative cochlear implant benefit in subjects with steeply sloping high-frequency hearing losses (HLs) who were implanted with standard long cochlear implant electrodes to: 1) determine the effect of etiology, 2) compare outcomes in studies exploring the use of combined electrical and acoustic stimulation, and 3) compare outcomes in patients implanted using standard criteria. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case review. SETTING: Tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: Nine adults with steeply sloping high-frequency congenital (n=2) or acquired (n=7) bilateral sensorineural HL. All pure-tone audiograms fit the criteria for trials of a short electrode aimed at preserving low-frequency acoustic hearing. INTERVENTION: Subjects received full insertion of a standard cochlear implant long electrode in the poorer ear. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Preoperative versus postoperative audiograms, word and sentence recognition in quiet and noise. RESULTS: Patients with progressive acquired HLs experienced significantly improved speech understanding in quiet and in noise with the cochlear implant, especially when combined with hearing aid use in the contralateral ear. Patients with congenital HLs experienced little or no improvement in the implanted ear when tested with the implant alone, but achieved some benefit when the implant was combined with a hearing aid in the nonimplanted ear. CONCLUSION: Based on this small sample, patients with acquired steeply sloping high-frequency HLs obtain significant benefit from cochlear implantation with standard long electrodes. In progressive losses, full insertion of a long electrode would be preferable to a short electrode because acoustic hearing may diminish over time. In contrast, patients with congenital losses may not benefit from long electrodes, and might be better served by implanting a short electrode, thereby allowing use of low-frequency acoustic stimulation.     

Conservation of low-frequency hearing in cochlear implantation

OBJECTIVES: As results with cochlear implants have continued to improve, patients with some remaining cochlear function have become eligible for cochlear implantation. Thus, preservation of acoustic hearing after implantation has gained importance. Hearing preservation can be considered a benchmark for atraumatic implantation preventing neural degeneration from loss of residual hair cells or subsequent to local trauma. In this prospective study, the possibility of preserving low-frequency hearing in cochlear implantation using a modified surgical technique has been explored. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In a prospective study design, 14 subjects with considerable low-frequency hearing of 20-60 dB in the frequency range 125-500 Hz but with unsatisfactory speech understanding with hearing aids of < 35% monosyllabic word understanding were implanted with a MED-EL COMBI-40+ cochlear implant. The insertion depth was intentionally limited to 19-24 mm to prevent damage to low-frequency regions of the cochlea. Pre- and postoperative pure-tone thresholds were measured. RESULTS: Hearing was conserved within 0-10 dB in 9/14 subjects and within 11-20 dB in 3/14; in 2/14 subjects hearing was completely lost in the implanted ear. Thus hearing could at least partially be conserved in 12/14 subjects (86%). Median threshold values decreased by 10, 15, 17.5 and 5 dB at 125, 250, 500 and 1000 Hz, respectively. Even high levels of hearing, e.g. 30 dB at 500 Hz, could be maintained after implantation in some subjects. CONCLUSIONS: This study reports successful conservation of hearing after cochlear implantation using a modified surgical technique. Even high levels of hearing could be maintained, showing that implantation of an intracochlear electrode can be performed atraumatically with preservation of functional structures.     

Hearing preservation in cochlear implantation for electric acoustic stimulation

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the possibility of preservation of low-frequency hearing in atraumatic cochlear implant electrode insertion procedures for combined, ipsilateral electric and acoustic stimulation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 21 patients were implanted with a MED EL C40+ cochlear implant using an atraumatic electrode insertion technique to preserve residual low-frequency hearing. Pure-tone audiometric thresholds were measured pre- and postoperatively to evaluate the degree of preserved hearing. Speech discrimination tests in quiet and with background noise were performed in a patient with successful hearing preservation. RESULTS: Using the atraumatic electrode insertion procedure with an insertion depth of 360 degrees (18-24 mm), hearing preservation could be achieved in 18/21 patients (85.7%). Three patients (14.3%) lost their residual low-frequency hearing after the implantation. Residual hearing was preserved completely in 13 patients (61.9%) and partial hearing preservation was possible in 5 (23.8%). Preliminary speech discrimination tests showed a dramatic benefit for the combined electric and acoustic stimulation mode compared to cochlear implantation alone. CONCLUSION: Preservation of low-frequency hearing in cochlear implantation is possible in patients implanted because of profound high-frequency deafness. With the development of new, more atraumatic electrode designs, preservation of residual hearing should be further improved.     

Zur Indikationserweiterung des „cochlear-implant”Freiburger Ergebnisse bei Patienten mit Resthörigkeit

The usual indication for a cochlear implant (CI) is acquired deafness in patients for whom conventional hearing aids are of no benefit. The question is whether CI is superior to the best conventional hearing aids for patients with some residual hearing, but who achieve only minimal speech recognition (< 30% in the Freiburg monosyllable word test at 70 dB (I) SPL) with optimal hearing aids. We report our experience with five patients with residual hearing who underwent cochlear implantation (Nucleus Mini 22 and 24) on the worse side. The patients were examined preoperatively and at 1, 6 and 12 months following activation of the implant. The Freiburg monosyllabic word test, the G?ttingen sentence test and consonant recognition were used to assess postoperative results. All patients benefitted from CI when test scores were compared with preoperative ones. All patients achieved a score in the Freiburg monosyllabic word test of more than 60% at 70 dB (I) SPL 12 months post switch-on. Four patients achieved a score of more than 85% in the G?ttingen sentence test. These results and the progress made in cochlear implant technology are an impetus to continue discussions of various considerations of criteria for cochlear implants and possibly extend these for patients with severe hearing impairment.     

有低频残余听力感音神经聋的人工耳蜗植入术

目的介绍一种有低频残余听力感音神经聋的人工耳蜗植入技术,探讨人工耳蜗植入手术对有残余听力患者的治疗效果和价值。方法15例有残余听力的患者接受了保护残余听力的人工耳蜗植入手术。术中电极植入深度在19mm～24mm左右。术后分别检测单纯使用助听器、单纯使用人工耳蜗、人工耳蜗结合助听器三种不同状态下的听力。结果15例患者中,有13例术后残余听力保存良好,仅分别丢失5～20dB听力,但另2例术后残余听力全部丧失。术后在安静、信噪比15dB和10dB三种不同状态下的言语测试结果显示,人工耳蜗结合助听器使用者测试得分始终保持在很高水平;单纯使用人工耳蜗者也有较好的成绩,但在信噪比达10dB的条件下,测试成绩下降;而单纯使用助听器者,不仅在安静状态下听力成绩不甚理想,一旦加入竞争性噪声,听力测试成绩急剧下降。结论保护和利用残余听力的人工耳蜗植入技术,使人工耳蜗植入手术对象从重度或极重度聋扩大到高频为重度或极重度聋,低频（≤500Hz）为中、轻度聋的患者。接受这项技术患者的听力和言语识别能力均明显优于其单纯配戴助听器和单纯使用人工耳蜗时的听力和言语识别能力。     

Conservation of low-frequency hearing in cochlear implantation

Objective As results with cochlear implants have continued to improve, patients with some remaining cochlear function have become eligible for cochlear implantation. Thus, preservation of acoustic hearing after implantation has gained importance. Hearing preservation can be considered a benchmark for atraumatic implantation preventing neural degeneration from loss of residual hair cells or subsequent to local trauma. In this prospective study, the possibility of preserving low-frequency hearing in cochlear implantation using a modified surgical technique has been explored.

Materials and Methods In a prospective study design, 14 subjects with considerable low-frequency hearing of 2–60 dB in the frequency range 125–500 Hz but with unsatisfactory speech understanding with hearing aids of < 35% monosyllabic word understanding were implanted with a MED-EL COMBI-40+ cochlear implant. The insertion depth was intentionally limited to 19–24 mm to prevent damage to low-frequency regions of the cochlea. Pre- and postoperative pure-tone thresholds were measured.

Results Hearing was conserved within 0-10 dB in 9/14 subjects and within 11–20 dB in 3/14; in 2/14 subjects hearing was completely lost in the implanted ear. Thus hearing could at least partially be conserved in 12/14 subjects (86%). Median threshold values decreased by 10, 15, 17.5 and 5 dB at 125, 250, 500 and 1000 Hz, respectively. Even high levels of hearing, e.g. 30 dB at 500 Hz, could be maintained after implantation in some subjects.

Conclusions This study reports successful conservation of hearing after cochlear implantation using a modified surgical technique. Even high levels of hearing could be maintained, showing that implantation of an intracochlear electrode can be performed atraumatically with preservation of functional structures.     

Hearing preservation in cochlear implantation for electric acoustic stimulation

Objective To evaluate the possibility of preservation of low-frequency hearing in atraumatic cochlear implant electrode insertion procedures for combined, ipsilateral electric and acoustic stimulation.

Material and Methods A total of 21 patients were implanted with a MED EL C40+ cochlear implant using an atraumatic electrode insertion technique to preserve residual low-frequency hearing. Pure-tone audiometric thresholds were measured pre- and postoperatively to evaluate the degree of preserved hearing. Speech discrimination tests in quiet and with background noise were performed in a patient with successful hearing preservation.

Results Using the atraumatic electrode insertion procedure with an insertion depth of 360° (18–24 mm), hearing preservation could be achieved in 18/21 patients (85.7%). Three patients (14.3%) lost their residual low-frequency hearing after the implantation. Residual hearing was preserved completely in 13 patients (61.9%) and partial hearing preservation was possible in 5 (23.8%). Preliminary speech discrimination tests showed a dramatic benefit for the combined electric and acoustic stimulation mode compared to cochlear implantation alone.

Conclusion Preservation of low-frequency hearing in cochlear implantation is possible in patients implanted because of profound high-frequency deafness. With the development of new, more atraumatic electrode designs, preservation of residual hearing should be further improved.     

Combined electric and contralateral acoustic hearing: word and sentence recognition with bimodal hearing.

PURPOSE: The authors assessed whether (a) a full-insertion cochlear implant would provide a higher level of speech understanding than bilateral low-frequency acoustic hearing, (b) contralateral acoustic hearing would add to the speech understanding provided by the implant, and (c) the level of performance achieved with electric stimulation plus contralateral acoustic hearing would be similar to performance reported in the literature for patients with a partial insertion cochlear implant. METHOD: Monosyllabic word recognition as well as sentence recognition in quiet and at +10 and +5 dB was assessed. Before implantation, scores were obtained in monaural and binaural conditions. Following implantation, scores were obtained in electric-only and electric-plus-contralateral acoustic conditions. RESULTS: Postoperatively, all individuals achieved higher scores in the electric-only test conditions than they did in the best pre-implant test conditions. All individuals benefited from the addition of low-frequency information to the electric hearing. CONCLUSION: A full-insertion cochlear implant provides better speech understanding than bilateral, low-frequency residual hearing. The combination of an implant and contralateral acoustic hearing yields comparable performance to that of patients with a partially inserted implant and bilateral, low-frequency acoustic hearing. These data suggest that a full-insertion cochlear implant is a viable treatment option for patients with low-frequency residual hearing.     

Binaural advantage on usage of hearing aid together with cochlear implant--examination on speech perception (Japanese monosyllable word list 67-S and Japanese HINT)]

Six cochlear implant recipients with hearing aids in the opposite ear were studied to survey binaural advantage. They were examined in separate tests by using a hearing aid alone, cochlear implant alone, and by using both devices (bimodal condition). Test items used were the Japanese monosyllable word list 67--S and Japanese HINT. Statistically significantly results were obtained in the bimodal condition, three out of six subjects were successful in the monosyllable word test and all successful in the Japanese HINT. We conclude that all subjects enjoyed binaural advantage in speech perception in bimodal condition with no conflict at the recognition level; even when different sounds from cochlear implant and contralateral hearing aid were received. The plasticity of the brain is thought to be of importance in the bimodal condition.     

Reimplantation with a conventional length electrode following residual hearing loss in four hybrid implant recipients

Abstract

Hypothesis

Revision surgery using a newer-generation conventional length cochlear implant electrode will provide improved speech perception in patients that initially underwent hybrid electrode implantation and experienced post-operative loss of residual hearing and performance deterioration.

Clinical presentation

We present four patients who experienced delayed post-operative hearing loss following implantation with the Nucleus Hybrid S8 device and underwent reimplantation with the Nucleus Freedom or Nucleus 5 device using the Contour Advance array. Pure-tone thresholds and speech perception data were retrospectively reviewed.

Intervention

Four subjects underwent reimplantation with the Nucleus Freedom or Nucleus 5 device after experiencing deteriorating performance related to delayed acoustic hearing loss. Comparison of pre-revision performance to the most recent post-revision performance demonstrated improved speech perception performance in all subjects following reimplantation.

Conclusions

A small percent of patients will experience a significant loss of residual low-frequency hearing following hybrid implantation thereby becoming completely reliant on a shorter electrode for electrical stimulation. In the current series, reimplantation with a conventional length electrode provided improved speech perception performance in such patients. Revision surgery with a conventional length electrode should be considered in ‘short electrode’ recipients who experience performance deterioration following loss of residual hearing.     

Cochlear implant in patients with residual hearing

Objective: The postoperative speech perception abilities of severely hearing-impaired patients with multi-channel cochlear implant were compared with preoperative speech perception performance with conventional hearing aids. Methods: Cochlear implantation was performed in six severely to profoundly hearing-impaired patients. They had unaided pure-tone thresholds of 70–100-dB HL and aided thresholds of 35–90-dB HL in the better ear, but were not able to perceive speech sounds well with hearing aids. Results: Postoperatively, all the patients had significantly improved speech perception performance, exceeded the average skills of profoundly deaf cochlear implant users, and were able to communicate without writing. Conclusion: These results imply that cochlear implant may be indicated for severely to profoundly deaf subjects, if they receive little or no benefit from conventional hearing aids.     

Combined acoustic and electric hearing: preserving residual acoustic hearing

The topic of this review is the strategy of preserving residual acoustic hearing in the implanted ear to provide combined electrical stimulation and acoustic hearing as a rehabilitative strategy for sensorineural hearing loss. This chapter will concentrate on research done with the Iowa/Nucleus 10mm Hybrid device, but we will also attempt to summarize strategies and results from other groups around the world who use slightly different approaches. A number of studies have shown that preserving residual acoustic hearing in the implanted ear is a realistic goal for many patients with severe high-frequency hearing loss. The addition of the electric stimulation to their existing acoustic hearing can provide increased speech recognition for these patients. In addition, the preserved acoustic hearing can offer considerable advantages, as compared to a traditional cochlear implant, for tasks such as speech recognition in backgrounds or appreciation of music and other situations where the poor frequency resolution of electric stimulation has been a disadvantage.     

Effects of loss of residual hearing on speech performance with the CI422 and the Hybrid-L electrode

Abstract

Objective

Preservation of residual low-frequency hearing has become a priority in cochlear implantation. The purpose of this study was to compare rates of hearing preservation and effects on performance of loss of low-frequency acoustic hearing with two different length electrodes.

Study design

Retrospective chart review.

Setting

Tertiary Care Hospital.

Patients

Twelve patients were implanted with the CI422 a slim-straight electrode; the second group consisted of 10 patients implanted with the Hybrid-L, a shorter hearing preservation electrode.

Main outcome measure

Audiometric thresholds and speech perception measures.

Results

At 1 year, 3/10 (30%) patients with the Hybrid-L and 7/12 (58%) patients with the CI422 lost residual acoustic hearing resulting in a profound hearing loss in the implanted ear. In comparing these patients in particular, mean CNC words in the implanted ear were 72% in the CI422 electrode group and 15% in the Hybrid-L electrode group at 1 year (P = 0.03). While hearing preservation rates with the Hybrid-L tended to be better, among recipients who lost residual hearing, speech perception was better in those with the longer CI422 electrode.

Conclusions

With emphasis on preservation of residual hearing, patients need to be counseled regarding possible outcomes and options should loss of residual hearing occur following implantation. While shorter electrodes may have better rates of hearing preservation, the patients with the longer straight electrode in our study had significantly better speech understanding following the loss of residual hearing.     

Monosyllable speech perception of Japanese hearing aid users with prelingual hearing loss: implications for surgical indication of cochlear implant

OBJECTIVE: The monosyllable speech perception ability after years of educational intervention was compared between prelingually deafened pediatric hearing aid users and their cochlear implant counterparts. DESIGN: An open-set monosyllabic speech perception test was conducted on all subjects. The test required subjects to indicate a corresponding Japanese character to that spoken by the examiner. Fifty-two subjects with prelingual hearing impairment (47 hearing aid users and 5 cochlear implant users) were examined. RESULTS: Hearing aid users with average pure-tone thresholds less than 90 dB HL demonstrated generally better monosyllable perception than 70%, which was equivalent or better performance than that of the cochlear implant group. Widely dispersed speech perception was observed within the 90-99 dB HL hearing-aid user group with most subjects demonstrating less than 50% speech perception. In the cluster of >100 dB HL, few cases demonstrated more than 50% in speech perception. The perception ability of the vowel part of each mora within the cochlear implant group was 100% and corresponding to that of hearing aid users with moderate and severe hearing loss. CONCLUSION: Hearing ability among cochlear implant users can be comparable with that of hearing aid users with average unaided pure-tone thresholds of 90 dB HL, after monosyllabic speech perception testing was performed.