1-Year Postactivation Results for Sequentially Implanted Bilateral Cochlear Implant Users

Abstract

Bilateral cochlear implantation allowed for better speech recognition in noise relative to unilateral performance for a group of 12 children who underwent sequential bilateral cochlear implantation at various ages. There was not a statistically significant relationship between speech recognition in noise benefit, which was defined as the difference in performance between the first implanted ear and the bilateral condition and the age at which the second implant was received. Children receiving bilateral cochlear implants younger than 4 years of age achieved better speech recognition in quiet performance for the later implanted ear as compared with children receiving their second cochlear implant after 4 year of age.

Speech-perception-in-noise and bilateral spatial abilities in adults with delayed sequential cochlear implantation

“…The median squelch effect for both CI 1 and CI 2 (0 dB and 1 dB, respectively) was within the accepted range of ≤2 dB (Laszig et al, 2004;Litovsky et al, 2006;Van Deun et al, 2010) on a 5% level of significance. The median summation benefits for both CI 1 (0 dB) and CI 2 (2 dB) added to BiCI in the NF condition was within the accepted value range of ≤6 dB (Litovsky et al, 2006;Wolfe et al, 2007;Eapen, Buss, Adunka, Pillsbury & Buchman, 2009;Van Deun et al, 2010) at the 5% level of significance. The median SRM benefit values were within the accepted range of 0 to 4 dB (Litovsky et al, 2006;Van Deun et al, 2010) only when the noise was directed to CI 1 at the 5% level of significance.…”

“…The latter can improve speech perception scores up to 19% in quiet and up to 16% in noise . Summation effects previously reported vary in effect sizes of up to 6 dB in some users and no effect or negative effects in others Laszig et al, 2004;Litovsky et al, 2006;Wolfe et al, 2007). The squelch effect is another possible advantage of bilateral hearing through bilateral cochlear implantation.…”

Cochlear Implants in Children: A Review

“…As with outcomes for children with unilateral cochlear implants, the degree of improvement varies widely between individuals. Improved speech perception in noise has been associated with shorter periods of hearing loss in the second ear in some studies (Litovsky et al, 2004;Peters et al, 2007;Steffens et al, 2008), but not all have found this link (Kuhn-Inacker et al, 2004;Litovsky et al, 2006a;Wolfe et al, 2007). Two studies that did not find improvements in speech perception in noise included children who had a long time period between their first and second cochlear implants.…”

“…There appears to be a consensus that children receiving a second implant over the age of 4 years perform much more poorly on speech recognition and sound localization tasks, and do not show evidence of true binaural processing (for example, Galvin et al, 2007a;Johnston et al, 2009;Wolfe et al, 2007). Current evidence suggests that simultaneous bilateral implantation is a safe surgical procedure, and may also offer advantages to ease of adaptation, although there may be greater challenges associated with programming and managing two devices in younger children (Ramsden et al, 2009).…”

“…As with unilateral implants, factors such as age at time of first implant and amount of pre-operative auditory stimulation in the ear implanted second contribute to outcomes, with younger children and those with pre-implant hearing aid use achieving better results (Galvin et al, 2007a;Peters et al, 2007;Wolfe et al, 2007;Zeitler et al, 2008) . Consistency of device use also influences outcomes, with most children implanted at younger ages adapting more quickly and with greater ease to using bilateral implants, whether they are simultaneously or sequentially implanted (Galvin et al, 2008a;Scherf et al, 2009).…”