Current Issue
Volumes and Issues
For Authors
Manuscript Guidelines
Review Process
Conflict of Interest
Copyright
About the Journal
Editorial Board
Aim and Scope
Policy and Ethical Guidelines
Promotion of the Journal
Print-Version Subscription
Publisher and Contact Information
Contact Information
Sign in
REVIEW PAPER
TREATMENTS FOR PARTIAL DEAFNESS USING COMBINED
ELECTRIC AND ACOUSTIC STIMULATION OF THE AUDITORY
SYSTEM
| 1 | Co-Director, Duke Hearing Center, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA; Adjunct Professor,
Department of Surgery, DUMC; Adjunct Professor, Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, Duke
University; Chief Strategy Advisor, Med-El Medical Electronics GmbH, Innsbruck, Austria; The Overseas Expert,
Marie Curie Project for the Remediation of Hearing Loss, five centers in Europe including the primary site at
the International Center of Hearing and Speech in Kajetany, Poland; Senior Fellow Emeritus, RTI International
(previously known as the Research Triangle Institute), Research Triangle Park, NC, USA |
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Publication date: 2012-06-30
J Hear Sci 2012;2(2):19–32
KEYWORDS
electric-acoustic stimulationcochlear implantpartial deafnesspartial deafness cochlear implantationhearing preservationauditory prostheses
ABSTRACT
This paper provides a summary of the experience to date with (1) combined electric and acoustic stimulation of the auditory
system (combined EAS) for persons with some residual hearing at low frequencies, and (2) a procedure called “partial deafness cochlear implantation” (PDCI) for persons with higher levels of residual hearing at low frequencies, including persons
with normal or nearly normal hearing at 500 Hz and lower frequencies. The paper also presents new results on the dependence of outcomes according to the levels of the residual hearing. In broad terms, both combined EAS and PDCI are highly
beneficial treatments, especially for speech reception in noise. In some cases synergistic effects are found, in which the speech
reception score for combined EAS or PDCI is greater than the sum of the scores for electric or acoustic stimulation only. In
addition, the new results demonstrate that patients with high levels of residual hearing (PDCI levels) receive benefits from
cochlear implantation that are at least as great as the benefits received by patients with lower levels of residual hearing. This
finding strongly supports the concept of providing cochlear implants for persons with substantial residual hearing at low frequencies; indeed, a “point of diminishing returns” has yet to be identified.
REFERENCES (22)
1.
von Ilberg C, Kiefer J, Tillein J et al: Electric-acoustic stimulation of the auditory system. New technology for severe hearing loss. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec, 1999; 61: 334–40.
2.
Skarzynski H, Lorens A, Piotrowska A: A new method of partial deafness treatment. Med Sci Monit, 2003; 9(4): CS20–24.
3.
Skarzynski H, Lorens A, Piotrowska A, Podskarbi-Fayette R: Results of partial deafness cochlear implantation using various electrode designs. Audiol Neurotol, 2009; 14(Suppl.1): 39–45.
4.
Wilson BS: Partial deafness cochlear implantation (PDCI) and electric-acoustic stimulation (EAS). Cochlear Implants Int, 2010; 11(Suppl.1): 56–66.
5.
Lawson D, Wilson B, Wolford R et al: Speech processors for auditory prostheses: combined electric and acoustic stimulation of the same cochlea. Eighth Quarterly Progress Report, NIH Project N01-DC-8-2105, Neural Prosthesis Program, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA, 2000.
6.
Wilson BS, Wolford RD, Lawson DT, Schatzer R: Speech processors for auditory prostheses: additional perspectives on speech reception with combined electric and acoustic stimulation. Third Quarterly Progress Report, NIH Project N01- DC-2-1002, Neural Prosthesis Program, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA, 2002.
7.
Wilson BS, Lawson DT, Müller JM et al: Cochlear implants: some likely next steps. Annu Rev Biomed Eng, 2003; 5: 207–49.
8.
Gstoettner W, Kiefer J, Baumgartner WD: Hearing preservation in cochlear implantation for electric acoustic stimulation. Acta Oto-Laryngologica, 2004; 124: 348–52.
9.
Dooley GJ, Blamey PJ, Seligman PM et al: Combined electrical and acoustical stimulation using a bimodal prosthesis. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 1993; 119: 55–60.
10.
Ching TYC, Psarros C, Hill M et al: Should children who use cochlear implants wear hearing aids in the opposite ear? Ear & Hearing, 2001; 22: 365–80.
11.
Morera C, Manrique M, Ramos A et al: Advantages of binaural hearing provided through bimodal stimulation via a cochlear implant and a conventional hearing aid: a 6-month comparative study. Acta Otolaryngologica, 2005; 125: 596–606.
12.
Skarzynski H, Lorens A: Partial deafness treatment. Cochlear Implants Int, 2010; 11(Suppl.1): 29–41.
13.
Gifford RH, Dorman MF, Brown CA: Psychophysical properties of low-frequency hearing: implications for perceiving speech and music via electric and acoustic stimulation. Adv Otorhinolaryngol, 2010; 67: 51–60.
14.
Baer T, Moore BC, Kluk K: Effects of low pass filtering on the intelligibility of speech in noise for people with and without dead regions at high frequencies. J Acoust Soci Am, 2002; 112: 1133–44.
15.
Kiefer J, Pok M, Adunka O et al: Combined electric and acoustic stimulation of the auditory system: results of a clinical study. Audiol Neurootol, 2005; 10: 134–44.
16.
Zhang T, Spahr AJ, Dorman MF: Frequency overlap between electric and acoustic stimulation and speech-perception benefit in patients with combined electric and acoustic stimulation. Ear & Hearing, 2010; 31: 195–201.
17.
Vermeire K, Anderson I, Flynn M, Van de Heyning P: The influence of different speech processor and hearing aid settings on speech perception outcomes in electric acoustic stimulation patients. Ear & Hearing, 2008; 29: 76–86.
18.
Gantz BJ, Hansen MR, Turner CW et al: Hybrid 10 clinical trial: preliminary results. Audiology & Neurotology, 2009; 14(Suppl.1): 32–38.
19.
Gantz BJ, Turner CW: Combining acoustic and electrical hearing. Laryngoscope, 2003; 113: 1726–30.
20.
Lenarz T, Stöver T, Buechner A et al: Hearing conservation surgery using the Hybrid-L electrode. Audiol Neurotol, 2009; 14(Suppl.1): 22–31.
21.
James C, Albegger K, Battmer R et al: Preservation of residual hearing with cochlear implantation: how and why. Acta OtoLaryngologica, 2005; 125: 481–91.
22.
Gifford RH, Dorman MF, Shallop JK, Sydlowski SA: Evidence for the expansion of adult cochlear implant candidacy. Ear & Hearing, 2010; 31: 186–94.
RELATED ARTICLE
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.