Children with sequential BI cochlear implants represent a unique population of individuals who have undergone variable amounts of auditory deprivation in each ear. Our findings suggest that many but not all of these children perform better on measures of localization acuity with two cochlear implants compared with one and are better at the task than children using the cochlear implant + hearing aid. These results must be interpreted with caution, because benefits on other tasks as well as the long-term benefits of BI cochlear implants are yet to be fully understood. The factors that might contribute to such benefits must be carefully evaluated in large populations of children using a variety of measures.

These results support a growing consensus that bilateral implantation provides functional benefits beyond those of unilateral implantation. Longitudinal data suggest that some aspects of binaural processing continue to develop up to 1 yr after implantation. The squelch effect, often reported as absent or rare in previous studies of bilateral cochlear implantation, was present for most subjects at the 1 yr measurement interval.

Unlike prior studies with bilateral cochlear implant users which considered only one interferer, the present study considered realistic listening situations wherein multiple interferers were present and in some cases originating from both hemifields. Speech reception thresholds were measured in bilateral users unilaterally and bilaterally in four different spatial configurations, with one and three interferers consisting of modulated noise and competing talkers. The data were analyzed in terms of binaural benefits including monaural advantage (better-ear listening) and binaural interaction. The total advantage (overall spatial release) received was 2-5 dB and was maintained with multiple interferers present. This advantage was dominated by the monaural advantage, which ranged from 1-6 dB and was largest when the interferers were mostly energetic. No binaural interaction benefit was found in the present study with either type of interferer (speech or noise). While the total and monaural advantage obtained for noise interferers was comparable to that attained by normal-hearing listeners, it was considerably lower for speech interferers. This suggests that bilateral users are less capable of taking advantage of binaural cues, in particular under conditions of informational masking. Furthermore, the use of noise interferers does not adequately reflect the difficulties experienced by bilateral users in real-life situations.