Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up
N/A N=43 Treatment

Cochlear Implantation in Cases of Single-Sided Deafness

Unilateral Moderate to Profound Hearing Loss · Asymmetric Hearing Loss · Single-Sided Deafness (SSD)

Enrolled (actual)
43
Serious AEs
0.0%
Results posted
Jul 2022
Primary outcome: Primary: Change in Word Recognition in Quiet Over Time — 4; 8; 0; 0 percentage of words correctly repeated — p=<0.001

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

OutcomeResultp-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

The primary goal of this project is to determine whether subjects with Single-Sided Deafness (SSD) experience an improvement in speech perception, localization, and quality of life with a cochlear implant as compared to an unaided listening condition.

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

View full record on ClinicalTrials.gov →

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.

Back to search