一侧人工耳蜗对侧助听器双模式聆听效果的研究进展

在耳聋患者中,有一部分是一侧耳重度或极重度聋,但对侧耳尚有一定的残余听力。随着人工耳蜗植入术适应症范围的不断扩大,越来越多的此类患者接受了单侧人工耳蜗植入(CI),形成了单耳听觉。然而单侧人工耳蜗植入患者的音调、音乐感知以及声源定位等能力不尽如人意。于是针对那些对侧耳有残余听力的单侧人工耳蜗植入者,出现了给非     

助听器与人工耳蜗的联合使用

人工耳蜗植入技术的适用范围已经从全聋患者扩宽到有残余听力的重度聋者，成为重度以及极重度聋患者恢复听力的重要康复手段。对于术后对侧耳仍具有残余听力的患者或者由于人工耳蜗植入电极的限制，使得植入耳的低频残余听力不能得到利用的患者，其残余频率段的言语识别率可能在随后的几年里呈进行性下降，     

人工耳蜗植入后对侧耳联合使用助听器的康复效果研究

人工耳蜗可以帮助重度或极重度聋人恢复或获得听力。近几年，随着植入技术的发展和言语编码策略的进步，人工耳蜗的适用范围已经扩展到双耳中到重度的耳聋患者。越来越多的患者在植入人工耳蜗后，对侧非植入耳仍有残余听力，但是大部分患者在手术后对侧耳不使用或不再使用助听器。那么人工耳蜗术后对侧耳联合使用助听器究竟可以为患者带来哪些帮助？它们之间是否会有不利影响？助听器应如何调整？本文将对以上问题加以阐述。     

单侧聋患者人工耳蜗植入的进展

既往未将双耳非对称性听力损失(asymmetric hearing loss ,AHL )的极端案例 -单侧听力损失(unilateral hearing loss , UHL )或单侧聋(single side deafness ,SSD)纳入人工耳蜗植入的适应症.近年来有人开始尝试为单侧聋伴有严重耳鸣的患者患耳植入人工耳蜗 ,结果发现不但可以有效地减轻甚至消除耳鸣 ,而且还发现适应后可以与健耳听力很好地整合 ,从而达到双耳聆听的效果.     

人工耳蜗植入对耳蜗残余听力的影响

现代人工耳蜗植入已成为治疗极重度聋的重要手段,但患者术后效果差异较大.研究表明声电联合刺激模式对不同程度听力损失患者大有益处,这就使人工耳蜗植入后耳蜗残余听力的保留显得至关重要.本文将就人工耳蜗植入对残余听力可能的损害机制,一些保留人工耳蜗术后听力的现有方案及其效果做一综述.     

人工耳蜗植入对耳蜗残余听力的影响

现代人工耳蜗植入已成为治疗极重度聋的重要手段,但患者术后效果差异较大.研究表明声电联合刺激模式对不同程度听力损失患者大有益处,这就使人工耳蜗植入后耳蜗残余听力的保留显得至关重要.本文将就人工耳蜗植入对残余听力可能的损害机制,一些保留人工耳蜗术后听力的现有方案及其效果做一综述.     

人工耳蜗植入对耳蜗残余听力的影响

现代人工耳蜗植入已成为治疗极重度聋的重要手段,但患者术后效果差异较大.研究表明声电联合刺激模式对不同程度听力损失患者大有益处,这就使人工耳蜗植入后耳蜗残余听力的保留显得至关重要.本文将就人工耳蜗植入对残余听力可能的损害机制,一些保留人工耳蜗术后听力的现有方案及其效果做一综述.     

人工耳蜗植入患者双耳聆听的相关研究进展

人工耳蜗植入被广泛应用于治疗助听器无效或效果不理想的双侧重度或极重度感音神经性耳聋患者。近年来随着人们对聆听质量要求的提高,患者常采用非植入侧佩戴助听器的双耳双模式(Binaural-Bimodal Fitting, BIM)或双侧人工耳蜗植入(Bilateral cochlear implantation, BCI)等方法以获得双耳聆听。同时对于单侧聋(Single-sided deafness, SSD)患者来说,人们也开始尝试为其植入人工耳蜗以达到双耳聆听的效果。本文在回顾近些年文献的基础上,对于双耳聆听的优势、单侧聋患者的人工耳蜗植入、双侧感音神经性耳聋的双耳双模式聆听以及双侧人工耳蜗植入的研究进展进行综述。     

有低频残余听力感音神经聋的人工耳蜗植入术

目的介绍一种有低频残余听力感音神经聋的人工耳蜗植入技术,探讨人工耳蜗植入手术对有残余听力患者的治疗效果和价值。方法15例有残余听力的患者接受了保护残余听力的人工耳蜗植入手术。术中电极植入深度在19mm～24mm左右。术后分别检测单纯使用助听器、单纯使用人工耳蜗、人工耳蜗结合助听器三种不同状态下的听力。结果15例患者中,有13例术后残余听力保存良好,仅分别丢失5～20dB听力,但另2例术后残余听力全部丧失。术后在安静、信噪比15dB和10dB三种不同状态下的言语测试结果显示,人工耳蜗结合助听器使用者测试得分始终保持在很高水平;单纯使用人工耳蜗者也有较好的成绩,但在信噪比达10dB的条件下,测试成绩下降;而单纯使用助听器者,不仅在安静状态下听力成绩不甚理想,一旦加入竞争性噪声,听力测试成绩急剧下降。结论保护和利用残余听力的人工耳蜗植入技术,使人工耳蜗植入手术对象从重度或极重度聋扩大到高频为重度或极重度聋,低频（≤500Hz）为中、轻度聋的患者。接受这项技术患者的听力和言语识别能力均明显优于其单纯配戴助听器和单纯使用人工耳蜗时的听力和言语识别能力。     

先天性语前聋中国儿童双耳人工耳蜗植入疗效观察

目的：评估双侧耳人工耳蜗植入对极重度感音神经性语前聋患儿的听觉与言语康复疗效。方法：2例先天性极重度感音神经性聋儿童，单侧耳人工耳蜗植入术后2年和3年分别施行对侧耳人工耳蜗植入。术后1年评估患儿左、右耳单耳及双耳人工耳蜗助听听阈和言语识别率。以及言语清晰度。结果：①双耳人工耳蜗助听与单耳人工耳蜗助听相比。平均听阈降低分别为13dB和11dB；②在安静环境中双耳人工耳蜗植入儿童的言语识别率(开放项列)分别平均提高为9％和10％，2例双耳人工耳蜗植入儿童的言语识别率(开放项列)分别达97％和95％；③在嘈杂环境中对言语的识别能力明显提高；④言语清晰度有明显改善。结论：双耳人工耳蜗植入可明显提高极重度感音神经性语前聋患儿在安静和噪声环境下的言语识别率，对语前聋儿童的言语和语言发育有明显的帮助。     

Binaural-bimodal fitting or bilateral implantation for managing severe to profound deafness: a review

There are now many recipients of unilateral cochlear implants who have usable residual hearing in the non-implanted ear. To avoid auditory deprivation and to provide binaural hearing, a hearing aid or a second cochlear implant can be fitted to that ear. This article addresses the question of whether better binaural hearing can be achieved with binaural/bimodal fitting (combining a cochlear implant and a hearing aid in opposite ears) or bilateral implantation. In the first part of this article, the rationale for providing binaural hearing is examined. In the second part, the literature on the relative efficacy of binaural/bimodal fitting and bilateral implantation is reviewed. Most studies on comparing either mode of bilateral stimulation with unilateral implantation reported some binaural benefits in some test conditions on average but revealed that some individuals benefited, whereas others did not. There were no controlled comparisons between binaural/bimodal fitting and bilateral implantation and no evidence to support the efficacy of one mode over the other. In the third part of the article, a crossover trial of two adults who had binaural/bimodal fitting and who subsequently received a second implant is reported. The findings at 6 and 12 months after they received their second implant indicated that binaural function developed over time, and the extent of benefit depended on which abilities were assessed for the individual. In the fourth and final parts of the article, clinical issues relating to candidacy for binaural/ bimodal fitting and strategies for bimodal fitting are discussed with implications for future research.     

What to do with the other ear after cochlear implantation

Unilateral cochlear implantation has become a widely accepted surgical intervention for both deaf children and adults. It is a reliable and effective method to rehabilitate profound deafness. Recently the benefits of the use of a contralateral hearing aid (bimodal stimulation) with a cochlear implant became clear. Bilateral cochlear implantation benefits bilateral input into the auditory system for adults and children. To provide the binaural advantages experienced by normal hearing subjects bilateral cochlear implantation or bimodal stimulation is probably indicated. Whether to choose between both possibilities depends on many factors. Cortical auditory evoked potential (CAEP) measurements can be an important tool to decide bilateral implantation in young children. Enough residual hearing in the non-implanted ear might benefit from bimodal stimulation. New protocols are needed for the audiological management for recipients of cochlear implants.     

Cortical auditory evoked responses from an implanted ear after 50 years of profound unilateral deafness

A male with unilateral deafness in the right ear since 8 years of age developed a sudden hearing loss in the left ear at age 63. A hearing aid was fitted in the left ear with limited benefit. The right ear received a cochlear implant (CI) 20 months later. Cortical auditory evoked potentials (CAEPs) and speech recognition scores (SRS) were measured in free-field three, six and nine months after implantation with the hearing aid alone, CI alone and bimodal condition (hearing aid and CI together). Three months after implantation the cortical responses for the two ears were similar, despite more than 50 years of unilateral auditory deprivation. CAEPs measured over time show evidence of binaural interaction and improvements in SRS.     

双耳双模式助听儿童情感语调感知特征

目的探讨单侧人工耳蜗植入儿童对侧配戴助听器能否提升其情感语调识别能力,不同的情绪语调识别是否存在难度差异。方法选取35例(男15例,女20例)双耳双模式助听的重度、极重度感音神经性听力损失儿童,组内比较单侧人工耳蜗助听状态和双模式助听两种状态下儿童的情感语调识别特征。结果双耳双模式助听状态下听障儿童的语调得分极显著高于单侧人工耳蜗助听状态(P<0.01),识别率总体提升了16.65%。开心语调提升了20.59%,生气语调提升了19.21%,难过语调提升了13.23%。个体数据分析发现,有82.85%的儿童体现出双耳双模式优势。两种助听状态下,生气语调识别得分显著高于开心和难过(P<0.05),双耳双模式助听状态下,23.53%的儿童会将开心感知为难过语调,22.79%的儿童会将难过感知为开心语调。结论相比于单侧人工耳蜗植入,儿童通过双模式助听可以获得情感语调感知优势;两种助听模式下,生气语调的识别均比开心和难过容易,开心和难过语调容易混淆。频率变化可能是儿童感知情感语调的重要线索,提示在康复训练中应予以重视。     

Cortical auditory evoked responses from an implanted ear after 50 years of profound unilateral deafness

Abstract

A male with unilateral deafness in the right ear since 8 years of age developed a sudden hearing loss in the left ear at age 63. A hearing aid was fitted in the left ear with limited benefit. The right ear received a cochlear implant (CI) 20 months later. Cortical auditory evoked potentials (CAEPs) and speech recognition scores (SRS) were measured in free-field three, six and nine months after implantation with the hearing aid alone, CI alone and bimodal condition (hearing aid and CI together). Three months after implantation the cortical responses for the two ears were similar, despite more than 50 years of unilateral auditory deprivation. CAEPs measured over time show evidence of binaural interaction and improvements in SRS. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

双侧人工耳蜗植入者在噪声环境下的言语辨别能力

目的 探讨双侧人工耳蜗植入患者的言语辨别能力。方法 用2例双侧人工耳蜗植入者比较双侧与单侧人工耳蜗在不同信噪比下对广东话声调的辨别能力。结果 在 15, 10和 5的信噪比下,双侧人工耳蜗的平均能力为96%,92%和88%,而左耳及右耳单侧人工耳蜗的平均成绩为86%,83和74%。在0,-5,-10及-15的信噪比下,单侧人工耳蜗的平均能力近于0%,而双侧人工耳蜗的平均成绩为80%,72%,68%和54%。结论 在不同信噪比下,双侧人工耳蜗植入更有助于提高对广东话声调的辨别能力。进一步证明了双侧人工耳蜗植入患者运用双耳听力的优势。     

双侧人工耳蜗植入者在噪声环境下的言语辨别能力

目的探讨双侧人工耳蜗植入患者的言语辨别能力.方法用2例双侧人工耳蜗植入者比较双侧与单侧人工耳蜗在不同信噪比下对广东话声调的辨别能力.结果在+15,+10和+5的信噪比下, 双侧人工耳蜗的平均能力为96%, 92%和88%, 而左耳及右耳单侧人工耳蜗的平均成绩为86%,83%和74%. 在0,-5,-10及-15的信噪比下,单侧人工耳蜗的平均能力近于0%,而双侧人工耳蜗的平均成绩为80%,72%,68%和54%.结论在不同信噪比下,双侧人工耳蜗植入更有助于提高对广东话声调的辨别能力. 进一步证明了双侧人工耳蜗植入患者运用双耳听力的优势.     

Benefits of bilateral cochlear implantation: a review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Although unilateral cochlear implantation generally provides good speech understanding under quiet conditions, cochlear implantation patients frequently report difficulty understanding speech when exposed to background noise and with sound localization. Since these two listening functions require binaural stimulation for normal individuals and hearing aid recipients, it is not surprising that there is growing interest in binaural implants. This update reviews the basics of binaural listening and the advantages and disadvantages of binaural cochlear implantation. RECENT FINDINGS: Although the psychoacoustic literature has long demonstrated the benefits of binaural hearing, only recently have studies shown improvement in speech intelligibility with bilateral implants compared with unilateral implants. Of the three known binaural mechanisms, the head shadow effect provides greater benefit than binaural squelch or summation. In addition, binaural cochlear implants improve the ability to localize sound. SUMMARY: Bilateral implantation provides multiple benefits to patients with severe to profound hearing loss. Research is currently directed at improving speech intelligibility by utilizing evolving technologies in speech-processing strategies.     

Simultaneous bilateral cochlear implantation in adults: a multicenter clinical study

OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of "simultaneous" bilateral cochlear implantation (both implants placed during a single surgical procedure) by comparing bilateral and unilateral implant use in a large number of adult subjects tested at multiple sites. DESIGN: Prospective study of 37 adults with postlinguistic onset of bilateral, severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss. Performance with the bilateral cochlear implants, using the same speech processor type and speech processing strategy, was compared with performance using the left implant alone and the right implant alone. Speech understanding in quiet (CNCs and HINT sentences) and in noise (BKB-SIN Test) were evaluated at several postactivation time intervals, with speech presented at 0 degrees azimuth, and noise at either 0 degrees , 90 degrees right, or 90 degrees left in the horizontal plane. APHAB questionnaire data were collected after each subject underwent a 3-wk "bilateral deprivation" period, during which they wore only the speech processor that produced the best score during unilateral testing, and also after a period of listening again with the bilateral implants. RESULTS: By 6-mo postactivation, a significant advantage for speech understanding in quiet was found in the bilateral listening mode compared with either unilateral listening modes. For speech understanding in noise, the largest and most robust bilateral benefit was when the subject was able to take advantage of the head shadow effect; i.e., results were significantly better for bilateral listening compared with the unilateral condition when the ear opposite to the side of the noise was added to create the bilateral condition. This bilateral benefit was seen on at least one of the two unilateral ear comparisons for nearly all (32/34) subjects. Bilateral benefit was also found for a few subjects in spatial configurations that evaluated binaural redundancy and binaural squelch effects. A subgroup of subjects who had asymmetrical unilateral implant performances were, overall, similar in performance to subjects with symmetrical hearing. The questionnaire data indicated that bilateral users perceive their own performance to be better with bilateral cochlear implants than when using a single device. CONCLUSIONS: Findings with a large patient group are in agreement with previous reports on smaller groups, showing that, overall, bilateral implantation offers the majority of patients advantages when listening in simulated adverse conditions.