Objective: To report on combined ipsilateral electrical and acoustic stimulation in a subset of conventional candidates for cochlear implantation where preoperative pure tone thresholds were ≤60 dB HL for 250 and 500 Hz. Methods: Subjects were 10 adults implanted with the Nucleus 24 Contour Advance perimodiolar electrode array. Soft surgical procedures were strictly observed: ≤1.5-mm cochleostomy hole placed anterior and inferior to the round window, a Healon bubble placed over the opening to prevent entry of foreign bodies, and no suction applied. The electrode array was inserted 17 mm to the first marker rib using the recommended ‘advance-off-stylet’ technique. Pure tone hearing threshold levels were recorded pre-, and postoperatively at 1–2 and 6–12 months. Speech recognition was tested for cochlear implant (CI) alone and combined with ipsilateral hearing aid for 7 subjects who retained significant residual hearing in the implanted ear at 1–2 months after operation. Results: There were 3/10 cases where 1–2 months after operation low-frequency responses were considered vibrotactile only (>85–110 dB HL, 250–500 Hz). In the remaining 7 cases, residual hearing was maintained up to at least 6 months after operation with minor changes. Insertion depth angles in these cases ranged from 285 to 420°. For these subjects, the mean preoperative score for words presented at 65 dB SPL was 22%. Mean postoperative scores were 56% for CI alone, and 68% for CI plus ipsilateral hearing aid (p < 0.05, paired t). For sentences presented in multitalker babble noise at 5 dB SNR, mean scores were 61% CI alone, and 75% CI+IpsiHA (p < 0.01, paired t). Conclusions: Hearing was conserved during surgery and over time in 70% of conventional candidates implanted with the Nucleus 24 Contour Advance CI who had significant levels of preoperative low-frequency residual hearing (≤60 dB HL). These conventional candidates for CI also benefited from improved speech recognition in noise when using combined ipsilateral electrical and acoustic stimulation.

Keywords:
Cochlear implant, Residual hearing, Speech recognition in noise
1.
Armstrong M, Pegg P, James C, Blamey P: Speech perception in noise with implant and hearing aid. Am J Otol 1997;18:S140–S141.
2.
Blamey P, Arndt P, Bergeron F, et al: Factors affecting auditory performance of postlinguistically deaf adults using cochlear implants. Audiol Neurootol 1996;1:293–306.
3.
Ching TY, Incerti P, Hill M: Binaural benefits for adults who use hearing aids and cochlear implants in opposite ears. Ear Hear 2004;25:9–21.
4.
Dunn CC, Tyler RS, Witt SA: Benefit of wearing a hearing aid on the unimplanted ear in adult users of a cochlear implant. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2005;48:668–680.
5.
Fraysse B, Ramos A, Sterkers O, et al: Residual hearing conservation and electro-acoustic stimulation with the Nucleus 24 Contour Advance cochlear implant. Otol Neurotol 2006;27:624–633.
6.
Gantz BJ, Turner CW: Combining acoustic and electrical hearing. Laryngoscope 2003;113:1726–1730.
7.
Gstoettner W, Kiefer J, Baumgartner WD, Pok S, Peters S, Adunka O: Hearing preservation in cochlear implantation for electric acoustic stimulation. Acta Otolaryngol 2004;124:348–352.
8.
James C, Albegger K, Battmer R, Burdo S, Deggouj N, Deguine O, Dillier N, Gersdorff M, Laszig R, Lenarz T, Manrique Rodriguez M, Mondain M, Offeciers E, Ramos Macias A, Ramsden R, Sterkers O, von Wallenberg E, Weber B, Fraysse B: Preservation of residual hearing with cochlear implantation: How and why. Acta Otolaryngol 2005;125:481–491.
9.
Kiefer J, Gstoettner W, Baumgartner W, Pok SM, Tillein J, Ye Q, von Ilberg C: Conservation of low-frequency hearing in cochlear implantation. Acta Otolaryngol 2004;124:272–280.
10.
Kong YY, Stickney GS, Zeng FG: Speech and melody recognition in binaurally combined acoustic and electric hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 2005;117:1351–1361.
11.
Skarzynski H, Lorens A, Piotrowska A: A new method of partial deafness treatment. Med Sci Monit 2003;9:CS20–CS24.
12.
UK Cochlear Implant Study Group: Criteria of candidacy for unilateral cochlear implantation in postlingually deafened adults. I. Theory and measures of effectiveness. Ear Hear 2004a;25:310–335.
13.
UK Cochlear Implant Study Group: Criteria of candidacy for unilateral cochlear implantation in postlingually deafened adults. II. Cost-effectiveness analysis. Ear Hear 2004b;25:336–360.
14.
Vandali AE, Sucher C, Tsang DJ, McKay CM, Chew JW, McDermott HJ: Pitch ranking ability of cochlear implant recipients: a comparison of sound-processing strategies. J Acoust Soc Am 2005;117:3126–3138.
15.
von Ilberg C, Kiefer J, Tillein J, et al: Electric-acoustic stimulation of the auditory system. ORL 1999;61:334–340.
16.
Xu J, Xu SA, Cohen LT, Clark GM: Cochlear view: postoperative radiography for cochlear implantation. Am J Otol 2000;21:49–56.
17.
Yukawa K, Cohen L, Blamey P, Pyman B, Tungvachirakul V, O’Leary S: Effects of insertion depth of cochlear implant electrodes upon speech perception. Audiol Neurootol 2004;9:163–172.
© 2006 S. Karger AG, Basel
2006
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.