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
. 2025 Apr;282(4):1853-1863.
doi: 10.1007/s00405-024-09086-x. Epub 2024 Dec 17.

Influence of cochlear coverage on speech perception in single sided deafness, bimodal, and bilateral implanted cochlear implant patients

Jennifer L Spiegel  1 , Joachim Mueller  2 , Rebecca Boehnlein  2 , John-Martin Hempel  2 , Judith E Spiro  3 , Bernhard G Weiss  2 , Mattis Bertlich  2 , Martin Canis  2 , Tobias Rader  2
Affiliations

Influence of cochlear coverage on speech perception in single sided deafness, bimodal, and bilateral implanted cochlear implant patients

Jennifer L Spiegel et al. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2025 Apr.

Abstract

Purpose: Individualized cochlear implantation (CI) is essential to facilitate optimal hearing results for patients. Influence of cochlear coverage (CC) has been studied, however without consideration of different CI-categories, like single sided deafness (SSD), bimodal, and bilateral separately.

Methods: Retrospective analysis of preoperative CT scans was performed at a tertiary center. For each patient their individual CC with the selected electrode array was calculated off the complete CDL. Patients were categorized into SSD (n = 30), bimodal (n = 72), and bilateral CI patients (n = 29). Speech perception within the first 12 months post-implantation was compared between patient groups with shorter and longer CC. For subgroup analysis the cutoff between a shorter or longer CC was identified by the median.

Results: Cutoff between a shorter or longer CC was identified at 65% off the complete CDL for SSD and bimodal patients, and at 70% for bilateral patients. In SSD-patients longer CC was associated with better performance at activation (CCshorter 20.0 ± 28.9% vs. CClonger 31.5 ± 24.7%; p = 0.04) and no benefit was found with deeper insertion at 12 months. No significant benefit was found for deeper insertion in bimodal and bilateral patients.

Conclusions: Capacities of hearing performance seem to differ between SSD, bimodal and bilateral patients within the first year after implantation with regards to cochlear coverage. SSD-patients appear to benefit from deeper insertion than 65% up to 12 months after implantation. However, these results should be interpreted with caution, hence development of speech perception with CI is influenced by a whole range of factors, and bimodal and bilateral treated patients are extremely heterogenous patient groups.

Keywords: Bimodal; Cochlear coverage; SSD; Single sided deafness; Speech perception.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Conflict of interest: TR and JLS received travel expenses from MED EL GmbH, Innsbruck, Austria and Cochlear Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG. Ethical approval: Study protocol was performed according to ethical guidelines of the 2002 Declaration of Helsinki, and carried out after approval by the Institutional Review Board and Ethics Committee of the Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany (Ethikkommission der LMU München) (reference number 19-562). Consent to participate: Not applicable. Consent for publication (include appropriate statements): Not applicable. Consolidated standard of reporting trial statement: Patient flow diagram see Fig. 1.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Consolidated Standard Reporting of Trials (CONSORT) Flow Diagram
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Distribution of Cochlear Coverage (CC) for the Patient Groups Single Sided Deafness (SSD), Bimodal, and Bilateral
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Speech Perception with Freiburg Monosyllabic Test with respect to the Cochlear Coverage for the Different Groups. For subgroup analysis the median cochlear coverage was identified at 65% for SSD and bimodal hearing patients, at 70% for bilateral patients. Data at first fitting (FF), 1 month (1 M), 3 months (3 M), and 12 months (12 M) are depicted in boxplots at the x-axis, the y-axis represents the correct identified monosyllables in percent of the German language Freiburg Monosyllabic Test [–41]. White boxplots resemble shorter CC, green boxplots longer CC. Outliner values are depicted as small circles. A Shows results for SSD patients, B for bimodal, and C for bilateral. *, significant p-value (p < 0.05)
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. WHO (2022) Deafness and hearing loss World Health Organization. https://www.who.int/health-topics/hearing-loss. Accessed 6 Aug 2023
    1. Arndt S, Laszig R, Aschendorff A, Hassepass F, Beck R, Wesarg T (2017) Cochlear implant treatment of patients with single-sided deafness or asymmetric hearing loss. HNO 65(Suppl 2):98–108. 10.1007/s00106-016-0297-5 - PubMed
    1. Cullington HE, Zeng FG (2011) Comparison of bimodal and bilateral cochlear implant users on speech recognition with competing talker, music perception, affective prosody discrimination, and talker identification. Ear Hear 32(1):16–30. 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3181edfbd2 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rader T, Fastl H, Baumann U (2013) Speech perception with combined electric-acoustic stimulation and bilateral cochlear implants in a multisource noise field. Ear Hear 34(3):324–332. 10.1097/AUD.0b013e318272f189 - PubMed
    1. von Ilberg CA, Baumann U, Kiefer J, Tillein J, Adunka OF (2011) Electric-acoustic stimulation of the auditory system: a review of the first decade. Audiol Neurootol 16(Suppl 2):1–30. 10.1159/000327765 - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources