Cochlear Implantation in Cases of Single-Sided Deafness
Unilateral Moderate to Profound Hearing Loss · Asymmetric Hearing Loss · Single-Sided Deafness (SSD)
Bottom Line
View on ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02203305 ↗Study Design & Population
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- N/A
- Interventions
- Cochlear Implant (Device); Control Group (Other)
- Age
- Adult, Older Adult · 18+ yrs
- Sex
- All
- Sponsor
- University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
- Primary completion
- Sep 2021
Outcome Measures
| Outcome | Result | p-value |
|---|---|---|
| PRIMARY Change in Word Recognition in Quiet Over Time |
4; 8; 0; 0; 36; 32 | <0.001 sig |
| PRIMARY Change in Localization Results (Measured in Root-mean-squared (RMS) Error) Over Time |
67; 76; 70; 79; 37; 52 | <0.019 sig |
| PRIMARY Change in Subjective Benefit (Measured With the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities (SSQ) of Hearing Questionnaire) Over Time |
4; 4; 6; 5; 6; 6 | <0.001 sig |
| PRIMARY Change in Sentence Recognition in Noise Over Time, Measured With the AzBio Sentences With Speech Presented From the Front and Noise Towards the Better Hearing Ear |
16; 3; 21; 5; 40; 8 | <0.161 |
| PRIMARY Change in Localization Results (Measured in Variable Error) Over Time |
24; 29; 26; 25; 23; 35 | <0.183 |
| PRIMARY Change in Localization Results (Measured in Constant Error) Over Time |
59; 67; 60; 73; 29; 37 | <0.071 |
| PRIMARY Change in Localization Results (Measured in Adjusted Constant Error) Over Time |
48; 48; 47; 53; 23; 30 | <0.024 sig |
| PRIMARY Change in Subjective Benefit (Measured With the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) Questionnaire) Over Time |
50; 52; 26; 32; 21; 28 | =0.011 sig |
| PRIMARY Change in Subjective Benefit (Measured With the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI) of Hearing Questionnaire) Over Time |
25; 18; 6; 4; 4; 2 | =0.221 |
| PRIMARY Change in Sentence Recognition in Noise Over Time, Measured With AzBio Sentences With Speech Presented From the Front and Noise Towards the Poorer Hearing Ear (Implanted Ear) |
83; 40; 88; 53; 87; 49 | <0.322 |
| PRIMARY Change in Sentence Recognition in Noise Over Time, Measured With AzBio Sentences With Speech and Noise Presented From the Front |
37; 18; 39; 23; 41; 28 | <0.581 |
| PRIMARY Change in Sentence Recognition in Noise Over Time, Measured With Bamford-Kowal-Bamford (BKB) Sentences With Speech and Noise Presented From the Front |
0.2; 4.2; -0.2; 3.3; -0.6; 2.6 | <0.440 |
| PRIMARY Change in Sentence Recognition in Noise Over Time, Measured With Bamford-Kowal-Bamford (BKB) Sentences With Speech Presented From the Front and Noise Towards the Better Hearing Ear |
1.8; 7.1; 0.7; 6.8; -0.2; 5.2 | <0.639 |
| PRIMARY Change in Sentence Recognition in Noise Over Time, Measured With Bamford-Kowal-Bamford (BKB) Sentences With Speech Presented From the Front and Noise Towards the Poorer Hearing Ear (Implanted Ear) |
-4.8; 1.4; -5.1; 0.4; -5.3; 0.5 | <0.671 |
| SECONDARY Aided Word Recognition With a Cochlear Implant Versus a Current Treatment Option (i.e., Hearing Aid) |
4; 8; 55; 55 | <0.001 sig |
| SECONDARY Localization Abilities With a Cochlear Implant Versus a Current Treatment Option (i.e., Bone-conduction Device) |
70; 76; 37; 52; 28; 48 | <0.001 sig |
| SECONDARY Subjective Benefit (Measured With the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit Questionnaire) With Cochlear Implant Versus Preoperative Perceptions With Alternative Treatment Options (e.g., Hearing Aid, Bone-conduction Device) |
50; 52; 26; 32; 21; 28 | <0.001 sig |
| SECONDARY Subjective Benefit (Measured With the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI) Questionnaire) With Cochlear Implant Versus Preoperative Perceptions With Alternative Treatment Options (e.g., Hearing Aid, Bone-conduction Device) |
25; 18; 6; 4; 4; 2 | <0.001 sig |
| SECONDARY Subjective Benefit (Measured With the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing (SSQ) Questionnaire) With Cochlear Implant Versus Preoperative Perceptions With Alternative Treatment Options (e.g., Hearing Aid, Bone-conduction Device) |
4; 4; 6; 5; 6; 6 | <0.001 sig |
| SECONDARY Speech Perception Outcomes With a Cochlear Implant Versus a Bone-conduction Device: Sentence Recognition in Noise (AzBio, Speech Front and Noise Front) |
32; 17; 47; 24 | =0.001 sig |
| SECONDARY Speech Perception Outcomes With a Cochlear Implant Versus a Bone-conduction Device: Sentence Recognition in Noise (AzBio, Speech Front and Noise to the Poorer Hearing Ear) |
61; 24; 85; 42 | =0.001 sig |
| SECONDARY Speech Perception Outcomes With a Cochlear Implant Versus a Bone-conduction Device: Sentence Recognition in Noise (AzBio, Speech Front and Noise to the Better Hearing Ear) |
18; 6; 53; 22 | <0.001 sig |
| SECONDARY Speech Perception Outcomes With a Cochlear Implant Versus a Bone-conduction Device: Sentence Recognition in Noise (BKB-Speech In Noise (SIN), Speech Front and Noise Front) |
0.8; 4.9; -0.8; 3.4 | =0.004 sig |
| SECONDARY Speech Perception Outcomes With a Cochlear Implant Versus a Bone-conduction Device: Sentence Recognition in Noise (BKB-SIN, Speech Front and Noise to the Poorer Hearing Ear) |
-2.6; 2.7; -4.8; 2.4 | <0.001 sig |
| SECONDARY Speech Perception Outcomes With a Cochlear Implant Versus a Bone-conduction Device: Sentence Recognition in Noise (BKB-SIN, Speech Front and Noise to the Better Hearing Ear) |
1.8; 6.1; -1.0; 4.4 | =0.001 sig |
| SECONDARY Speech Recognition in Noise for a Control Group: AzBio Sentences (0 dB SNR) |
32; 69; 10; 19; 80; 7 | — |
| SECONDARY Speech Recognition in Noise for a Control Group: BKB-SIN Test |
-1; -2.5; 2; -1; -4.5; 3 | — |
| SECONDARY Localization for a Control Group |
63; 60 | — |
| SECONDARY Subjective Benefit for a Control Group: Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) |
4.5; 1.7; 5.2; 3.6 | — |
| SECONDARY Subjective Benefit for a Control Group: Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) |
26.3; 19.2; 39.5; 41.7; 4.7 | — |
Summary
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria (SSD):
- Unilateral moderate-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss [Unaided residual hearing thresholds measured from 250-8000 Hertz (Hz) (Pure Tone Average (PTA) ≥70 decibel (dB) Hearing Level (HL) in the ear to be implanted]
- Normal to mild residual hearing thresholds from 250-8000 Hz in the contralateral ear (≤35 dB HL at each frequency, 250-8000 Hz)
- Greater than or equal to 18 years of age at implantation
- Duration of moderate-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss less than or equal to 5 years [Either reported by subject or documented in previous audiograms] [Can be less than or equal to 10 years if the subject consistently utilized hearing technology (such as a bone conduction device or conventional hearing aid) within the past 5 years]
- Previous experience with a current treatment option for SSD, including a conventional hearing aid, bone-conduction device, or CROS/BICROS (Bilateral Contralateral Routing Of the Signal) technology. [At least one month of listening experience with device] [Dissatisfaction with and/or discontinued use of current treatment option due to: insufficient gain, poor sound quality, and/or lack of perceived benefit]
- Aided word recognition in the ear to be implanted of 60% or less as measured with Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant (CNC) words (50-word list) [When listening with an appropriately fit hearing aid and masking applied to the contralateral ear] [Aided testing will be conducted in a sound-proof booth with the subject seated 1 meter from the sound source, facing 0° azimuth. Recorded materials will be presented at 60 dB Sound Pressure Level (SPL).] [The hearing aid output will be measured using National Acoustic Laboratory-NonLinear (NAL-NL1) targets.]
- Realistic expectations
- Willing to obtain recommended meningitis vaccinations per Center for Disease Control (CDC) recommendations
- No reported cognitive issues [Pass the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) screener]
- Able and willing to comply with study requirements, including travel to investigational site and study-related activities
Exclusion Criteria (SSD):
- Non-native English speaker [Speech perception materials are presented in English]
- Conductive hearing loss in either ear
- Compromised auditory nerve, including those with a history of vestibular schwannoma
- Ossification
- Inability to participate in follow-up procedures (i.e., unwillingness, geographic location)
- History of meningitis, autoimmune disease, or any medical condition that contraindicate middle or inner ear surgery or anesthesia
- Meniere's disease with intractable vertigo
- Trauma that precludes inner ear surgery
- Case of sudden sensorineural hearing loss that has not been first evaluated by a physician
- Pregnancy [Subjects who are pregnant or become pregnant prior to surgery are excluded due to the potential risk of anesthesia to an unborn child.] [Subjects who become pregnant after surgery may continue to participate in study procedures]
- Tinnitus as the primary purpose for seeking cochlear implantation
- Subject obtains a severe or catastrophic score on the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (Newman, Jacobson & Spitzer, 1996).
Inclusion Criteria (asymmetric hearing loss):
a. Ear to be implanted i. Moderate-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss ii. PTA ≥70 dB HL iii. Aided word recognition of 60% or less as measured with CNC words (50-word list).
b. Contralateral ear i. PTA ≥35 and ≤55 dB HL ii. Aided word recognition of 80% or more as measured with CNC words (50-word list).
iii. Use of conventional amplification c. Greater than or equal to 18 years of age at implantation d. Duration of moderate-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss in the ear to be implanted is less than or equal to 5 years [Either reported by subject or documented in previous audiograms. Can be up to 10 years if the subject consistently utilized hearing technology in the ear to be implanted (such as a bone conduction device or conventional hearing aid) within the
Data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02203305). Outcome figures and adverse-event rates are extracted automatically from the registry's posted results and are provided for clinician reference, not as a substitute for the primary publication.