Objective: To update a 15-year-old study of 800 postlinguistically deaf adult patients showing how duration of severe to profound hearing loss, age at cochlear implantation (CI), age at onset of severe to profound hearing loss, etiology and CI experience affected CI outcome. Study Design: Retrospective multicenter study. Methods: Data from 2251 adult patients implanted since 2003 in 15 international centers were collected and speech scores in quiet were converted to percentile ranks to remove differences between centers. Results: The negative effect of long duration of severe to profound hearing loss was less important in the new data than in 1996; the effects of age at CI and age at onset of severe to profound hearing loss were delayed until older ages; etiology had a smaller effect, and the effect of CI experience was greater with a steeper learning curve. Patients with longer durations of severe to profound hearing loss were less likely to improve with CI experience than patients with shorter duration of severe to profound hearing loss. Conclusions: The factors that were relevant in 1996 were still relevant in 2011, although their relative importance had changed. Relaxed patient selection criteria, improved clinical management of hearing loss, modifications of surgical practice, and improved devices may explain the differences.

Keywords:
Cochlear implant, Percentile rank, Hearing loss, Plasticity, General linear model, Learning curve
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: Are spiral ganglion cell numbers important for speech perception with a cochlear implant? Am J Otol 1997;18:S11–S12.
3.
Blamey PJ: Adaptive dynamic range optimization (ADRO): a digital amplification strategy for hearing aids and cochlear implants. Trends Amplif 2005;9:77–98.
4.
Blamey P, Arndt P, Bergeron F, Bredberg G, Brimacombe J, Facer G, Larky J, Lindstrom B, Nedzelski J, Peterson A, Shipp D, Staller S, Whitford L: Factors affecting auditory performance of postlinguistically deaf adults using cochlear implants. Audiol Neurootol 1996;1:293–306.
5.
Champoux F, Lepore F, Gagne JP, Theoret H: Visual stimuli can impair auditory processing in cochlear implant users. Neuropsychologia 2009;47:17–22.
6.
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.
7.
Coelho DH, Yeh J, Kim JT, Lalwani AK: Cochlear implantation is associated with minimal anesthetic risk in the elderly. Laryngoscope 2009;119:355–358.
8.
Cohen LT: Practical model description of peripheral neural excitation in cochlear implant recipients. 4. Model development at low pulse rates: general model and application to individuals. Hear Res 2009;248:15–30.
9.
Cullen RD, Higgins C, Buss E, Clark M, Pillsbury HC 3rd, Buchman CA: Cochlear implantation in patients with substantial residual hearing. Laryngoscope 2004;114:2218–2223.
10.
Deltenre P, Mansbach AL, Bozet C, Clercx A, Hecox KE: Temporal distortion products (kernel slices) evoked by maximum-length-sequences in auditory neuropathy: evidence for a cochlear pre-synaptic origin. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1997;104:10–16.
11.
Di Lella F, Bacciu A, Pasanisi E, Vincenti V, Guida M, Bacciu S: Main peak interleaved sampling (MPIS) strategy: effect of stimulation rate variations on speech perception in adult cochlear implant recipients using the Digisonic SP cochlear implant. Acta Otolaryngol 2010;130:102–107.
12.
Dooley GJ, Blamey PJ, Seligman PM, Alcantara JI, Clark GM, Shallop JK, Arndt P, Heller JW, Menapace CM: Combined electrical and acoustical stimulation using a bimodal prosthesis. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1993;119:55–60.
13.
Doucet ME, Bergeron F, Lassonde M, Ferron P, Lepore F: Cross-modal reorganization and speech perception in cochlear implant users. Brain 2006;129:3376–3383.
14.
Dowell RC: Evidence about effectiveness of cochlear implants in adults; in Wong L, Hickson L (eds): Evidence-Based Practice in Audiology. San Diego, Singular Publishing, 2012.
15.
Durisin M, Bartling S, Arnoldner C, Ende M, Prokein J, Lesinski-Schiedat A, Lanfermann H, Lenarz T, Stover T: Cochlear osteoneogenesis after meningitis in cochlear implant patients: a retrospective analysis. Otol Neurotol 2010;31:1072–1078.
16.
Finley CC, Holden TA, Holden LK, Whiting BR, Chole RA, Neely GJ, Hullar TE, Skinner MW: Role of electrode placement as a contributor to variability in cochlear implant outcomes. Otol Neurotol 2008;29:920–928.
17.
Finney EM, Fine I, Dobkins KR: Visual stimuli activate auditory cortex in the deaf. Nat Neurosci 2001;4:1171–1173.
18.
Firszt JB, Holden LK, Reeder RM, Skinner MW: Speech recognition in cochlear implant recipients: comparison of standard hires and hires 120 sound processing. Otol Neurotol 2009;30:146–152.
19.
Firszt JB, Reeder RM, Skinner MW: Restoring hearing symmetry with two cochlear implants or one cochlear implant and a contralateral hearing aid. J Rehabil Res Dev 2008;45:749–767.
20.
Fraysse B, Macias AR, Sterkers O, Burdo S, Ramsden R, Deguine O, Klenzner T, Lenarz T, Rodriguez MM, Von Wallenberg E, James C: Residual hearing conservation and electroacoustic stimulation with the nucleus 24 contour advance cochlear implant. Otol Neurotol 2006;27:624–633.
21.
Friedland DR, Runge-Samuelson C: Soft cochlear implantation: rationale for the surgical approach. Trends Amplif 2009;13:124–138.
22.
Gifford RH, Dorman MF, Shallop JK, Sydlowski SA: Evidence for the expansion of adult cochlear implant candidacy. Ear Hear 2010;31:186–194.
23.
Giraud AL, Lee HJ: Predicting cochlear implant outcome from brain organisation in the deaf. Restor Neurol Neurosci 2007;25:381–390.
24.
Green KM, Bhatt YM, Mawman DJ, O’Driscoll MP, Saeed SR, Ramsden RT, Green MW: Predictors of audiological outcome following cochlear implantation in adults. Cochlear Implants Int 2007;8:1–11.
25.
Handzel O, Burgess BJ, Nadol JB Jr: Histopathology of the peripheral vestibular system after cochlear implantation in the human. Otol Neurotol 2006;27:57–64.
26.
Hodges AV, Schloffman J, Balkany T: Conservation of residual hearing with cochlear implantation. Am J Otol 1997;18:179–183.
27.
James CJ, Skinner MW, Martin LF, Holden LK, Galvin KL, Holden TA, Whitford L: An investigation of input level range for the nucleus 24 cochlear implant system: speech perception performance, program preference, and loudness comfort ratings. Ear Hear 2003;24:157–174.
28.
Johnson JA, Cox RM, Alexander GC: Development of APHAB norms for WDRC hearing aids and comparisons with original norms. Ear Hear 2010;31:47–55.
29.
Khan AM, Handzel O, Burgess BJ, Damian D, Eddington DK, Nadol JB Jr: Is word recognition correlated with the number of surviving spiral ganglion cells and electrode insertion depth in human subjects with cochlear implants? Laryngoscope 2005;115:672–677.
30.
Kiefer J, von Ilberg C, Reimer B, Knecht R, Gall V, Diller G, Sturzebecher E, Pfennigdorff T, Spelsberg A: Results of cochlear implantation in patients with severe to profound hearing loss – Implications for patient selection. Audiology 1998;37:382–395.
31.
Kujawa SG, Liberman MC: Adding insult to injury: cochlear nerve degeneration after ‘temporary’ noise-induced hearing loss. J Neurosci 2009;29:14077–14085.
32.
Lazard DS, Bordure P, Lina-Granade G, Magnan J, Meller R, Meyer B, Radafy E, Roux PE, Gnansia D, Pean V, Truy E: Speech perception performance for 100 post-lingually deaf adults fitted with neurelec cochlear implants: comparison between Digisonic® convex and Digisonic® SP devices after a 1-year follow-up. Acta Otolaryngol 2010a;130:1267–1273.
33.
Lazard DS, Giraud AL, Truy E, Lee HJ: Evolution of non-speech sound memory in postlingual deafness: implications for cochlear implant rehabilitation. Neuropsychologia 2011;49:2475–82.
34.
Lazard DS, Lee HJ, Gaebler M, Kell CA, Truy E, Giraud AL: Phonological processing in post-lingual deafness and cochlear implant outcome. Neuroimage 2010b;49:3443–3451.
35.
Lazard DS, Vincent C, Venail F, Van de Heyning P, Truy E, Sterkers O, Skarzynski PH, Skarzynski H, Schauwers K, O’Leary S, Mawman D, Maat B, Kleine-Punte A, Huber AM, Green K, Govaerts PJ, Fraysse B, Dowell R, Dillier N, Burke E, Beynon A, Bergeron F, Başkent D, Artières F, Blamey PJ: Pre-, per- and postoperative factors affecting performance of postlinguistically deaf adults using cochlear implants: a new conceptual model over time. PLoS One, in press.
36.
Lee DS, Lee JS, Oh SH, Kim SK, Kim JW, Chung JK, Lee MC, Kim CS: Cross-modal plasticity and cochlear implants. Nature 2001;409:149–150.
37.
Lee HJ, Giraud AL, Kang E, Oh SH, Kang H, Kim CS, Lee DS: Cortical activity at rest predicts cochlear implantation outcome. Cereb Cortex 2007;17:909–917.
38.
Lenarz T: Cochlear implants: selection criteria and shifting borders. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Belg 1998;52:183–199.
39.
Loh C, Jiang D, Dezso A, Fitzgerald O’Connor A: Non-sutured fixation of cochlear implants using a minimally-invasive approach. Clin Otolaryngol 2008;33:259–261.
40.
Loizou PC: Speech processing in vocoder-centric cochlear implants. Adv Otorhinolaryngol 2006;64:109–143.
41.
Mack KF, Heermann R, Issing PR, Lenarz T, Schwab B: Four years’ experience with the minimally invasive surgical approach in cochlear implant surgery. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 2006;15:187–192.
42.
Matterson AG, O’Leary S, Pinder D, Freidman L, Dowell R, Briggs R: Otosclerosis: selection of ear for cochlear implantation. Otol Neurotol 2007;28:438–446.
43.
McDermott HJ: A technical comparison of digital frequency-lowering algorithms available in two current hearing aids. PLoS One 2011;6:e22358.
44.
Moore DR, Shannon RV: Beyond cochlear implants: awakening the deafened brain. Nat Neurosci 2009;12:686–691.
45.
Nadol JB Jr, Eddington DK: Histopathology of the inner ear relevant to cochlear implantation. Adv Otorhinolaryngol 2006;64:31–49.
46.
NIH Consensus Conference. Cochlear implants in adults and children. JAMA 1995;274:1955–1961.
47.
Rance G, Beer DE, Cone-Wesson B, Shepherd RK, Dowell RC, King AM, Rickards FW, Clark GM: Clinical findings for a group of infants and young children with auditory neuropathy. Ear Hear 1999;20:238–252.
48.
Rouger J, Lagleyre S, Fraysse B, Deneve S, Deguine O, Barone P: Evidence that cochlear-implanted deaf patients are better multisensory integrators. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2007;104:7295–7300.
49.
Rubinstein JT, Parkinson WS, Tyler RS, Gantz BJ: Residual speech recognition and cochlear implant performance: effects of implantation criteria. Am J Otol 1999;20:445–452.
50.
Serin GM, Derinsu U, Sari M, Gergin O, Ciprut A, Akdas F, Batman C: Cochlear implantation in patients with bilateral cochlear trauma. Am J Otolaryngol 2010;31:350–355.
51.
Skinner MW, Ketten DR, Holden LK, Harding GW, Smith PG, Gates GA, Neely JG, Kletzker GR, Brunsden B, Blocker B: CT-derived estimation of cochlear morphology and electrode array position in relation to word recognition in Nucleus-22 recipients. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2002;3:332–350.
52.
Somdas MA, Li PM, Whiten DM, Eddington DK, Nadol JB Jr: Quantitative evaluation of new bone and fibrous tissue in the cochlea following cochlear implantation in the human. Audiol Neurootol 2007;12:277–284.
53.
Strelnikov K, Rouger J, Demonet JF, Lagleyre S, Fraysse B, Deguine O, Barone P: Does brain activity at rest reflect adaptive strategies? Evidence from speech processing after cochlear implantation. Cereb Cortex 2010;20:1217–1222.
54.
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.
55.
Zeng F-G: Advances in auditory prostheses; in Zeng F, Popper A, Fay R (eds): Auditory Prostheses: New Horizons. New York, Springer Handbook of Auditory Research 39, 2011, pp 1–11.
© 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel
2012
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.