Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2021 Dec 9;42(4):331-341.
doi: 10.1055/s-0041-1739283. eCollection 2021 Nov.

Determining Cochlear Implant Candidacy in Adults: Limitations, Expansions, and Opportunities for Improvement

Affiliations
Review

Determining Cochlear Implant Candidacy in Adults: Limitations, Expansions, and Opportunities for Improvement

Teresa A Zwolan et al. Semin Hear. .

Abstract

The safety, efficacy, and success of cochlear implants (CIs) are well established and have led to changes in criteria used by clinicians to determine who should receive a CI. Such changes in clinical decision-making have out-paced the slower-occurring changes that have taken place with regulatory bodies' and insurers' indications. We review the historical development of indications for CIs, including those of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurers. We report on expansion to include patients with greater residual hearing, such as those who receive Hybrid and EAS devices, and report on recent FDA approvals that place less emphasis on the patient's best-aided condition and greater emphasis on the ear to be treated. This includes expansion of CIs to patients with single-side deafness and asymmetric hearing loss. We review changes in the test materials used to determine candidacy, including transition from sentences in quiet to sentences in noise to the recent use of monosyllabic words and cognitive screening measures. Importantly, we discuss the recent trend to recommend CIs despite a patient not meeting FDA or insurers' indications (a practice known as "off-label"), which serves as attestation that current indications need to be updated.

Keywords: FDA approval; cochlear implant candidacy; indications; speech recognition.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Cochlear Americas: Advisory board member and consultant (unpaid). Envoy Medical: Advisory board member (unpaid). Institute for Cochlear Implant Training Course Director and Instructor.

References

    1. Van Norman G A. Drugs, devices, and the FDA: Part 2: An overview of approval processes: FDA approval of medical devices. JACC Basic Transl Sci. 2016;1(04):277–287. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Fargen K M, Frei D, Fiorella D. The FDA approval process for medical devices: an inherently flawed system or a valuable pathway for innovation? J Neurointerv Surg. 2013;5(04):269–275. - PubMed
    1. Multicenter Clinical Trial Group . Roland J T, Jr, Gantz B J, Waltzman S B, Parkinson A J. United States multicenter clinical trial of the cochlear nucleus hybrid implant system. Laryngoscope. 2016;126(01):175–181. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Pillsbury H C, III, Dillon M T, Buchman C A. Multicenter US clinical trial with an electric-acoustic stimulation (EAS) system in adults: final outcomes. Otol Neurotol. 2018;39(03):299–305. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gifford R H, Dorman M F, Shallop J K, Sydlowski S A. Evidence for the expansion of adult cochlear implant candidacy. Ear Hear. 2010;31(02):186–194. - PMC - PubMed