Cochlear implant (CI) overall provides a very good outcome, but speech comprehension outcome in the elderly is more variable. Several clinical factors play an important role. The management of residual hearing, the presence of comorbidities, and especially the progression of cognitive decline seem to be the clinical parameters that strongly determine the outcome of cochlear implantation and need to be discussed prospectively in the consultation process with the elderly hearing impaired. In the context of this review article, strategies for dealing with these will be discussed. Timely cochlear implantation should already be considered by hearing aid acousticians or practicing otolaryngologists and communicated or initiated with the patient. This requires intensive cooperation between hearing aid acousticians and experts in the clinic. In addition, residual hearing and comorbidities in the elderly need to be considered to make realistic predictions about speech comprehension with CI. Long-term aftercare and its different implementations should be discussed preoperatively, so that the elderly person with hearing impairments feels well taken care of together with his or her relatives. Elderly patients with hearing impairments benefit most from a CI in terms of speech comprehension if there is a large cochlear coverage (electrical or acoustic electrical) and the therapy is not hampered by comorbidities, especially cognitive decline.

When the impedance of an electrode contact is highly increased in a cochlear implant, a failure of the appropriate electrode seems obvious. We present a case where impedances of some electrodes were at the lower edge of the normal range and not regarded as suspicious neither by the clinical fitting software nor by in‐vivo tests conducted by the implant manufacturer. However, speech comprehension was substantially degraded and sound perception distorted. Also, on the affected electrodes, loudness perception was compromised and responses of the electrically evoked compound action potential were no longer measureable. After re‐implantation, the subjective sound percept was clear again and speech comprehension scored much better than before. Later, inspection of the explant revealed shorts on the device and the implant was classified as device failure. Our case shows the importance of collecting longitudinal data of cochlear implant patients, i.e. device related technical measurements and hearing performance data, and the consideration of all these data in cases of patient complaints or suspected implant failures. Laryngoscope, 2020

Objectives: The primary aim was to investigate the variability in language development in children aged 5–7.5 years after bilateral cochlear implantation (CI) up to the age of 2 years, and any impact of the age at implantation and additional noncognitive or anatomical disorders at implantation. Design: Data of 84 congenitally deaf children that had received simultaneous bilateral CI at the age of ≤ 24 months were included in this retrospective study. The results of language comprehension acquisition were evaluated using a standardized German language acquisition test for normal hearing preschoolers and first graders. Data on speech perception of monosyllables and sentences in quiet and noise were added. Results: In a monosyllabic test, the children achieved a median performance of 75.0 ± 12.88%. In the sentence test in quiet, the median performance was 89 ± 12.69%, but dropped to 54 ± 18.92% in noise. A simple analysis showed a significant main effect of age at implantation on monosyllabic word comprehension ( p < .001), but no significant effect of comorbidities that lacked cognitive effects ( p = .24). Language acquisition values correspond to the normal range of children with normal hearing. Approximately 25% of the variability in the language acquisition tests is due to the outcome of the monosyllabic speech perception test. Conclusions: Congenitally deaf children who were fitted bilaterally in the 1st year of life can develop age-appropriate language skills by the time they start school. The high variability in the data is partly due to the age of implantation, but additional factors such as cognitive factors (e.g., working memory) are likely to influence the variability.

To document and analyze the cochlear implant (CI) decision-making process of hearing-impaired older adults. The aim of this study is to assess what support could be helpful during this process in o...

Research suggests that cochlear implant (CI) use in elderly people improves speech perception and health-related quality of life (HRQOL). CI provision could also prevent dementia and other comorbidities and support healthy aging. The aim of this study was (1) to prospectively investigate potential changes in HRQOL and speech perception and (2) to identify clinical action points to improve CI treatment. Participants (n = 45) were CI recipients aged 60–90 with postlingual deafness. They were divided into groups, according to age: Group 1 (n = 20) received a CI between the age of 60–70 years; group 2 (n = 25) between the age of 71–90 years. HRQOL and speech perception were assessed preoperatively, and three and twelve months postoperatively. HRQOL and speech perception increased significantly within one year postoperatively in both groups. No difference between groups was found. We conclude that CI treatment improves speech perception and HRQOL in elderly users. Improvement of the referral process for CI treatment and a holistic approach when discussing CI treatment in the elderly population could prevent auditory deprivation and the deterioration of cognitive abilities.

This retrospective study aimed to investigate the range of hearing levels in a cochlear implant (CI) elderly population receiving electric-acoustic-stimulation (EAS) or electric-stimulation (ES) alone. The investigation evaluates the degree of hearing preservation (HP) and the speech comprehension resulting from EAS or ES-only to identify audiometric factors that predict adequate EAS and ES use. We analyzed the pure tone audiometry and speech perception in quiet and noise preoperatively and 12-months after activation of 89 elderly adults (age of 65 years old or older), yielding in total 97 CIs. Thirty-two (33.1%) patients were potential EAS candidates preoperatively, of which 18 patients used EAS at the time of first fitting and the other 14 patients continued to use their residual hearing for EAS at 12-months. Post-treatment, patients with EAS system and ES-only users’ with longer electrodes showed better results in monosyllable word scores in quiet than ES-only users with shorter electrodes. A similar trend was revealed for the speech recognition in noise. Patients with an EAS system benefit from maintaining their natural residual hearing. Nevertheless, strict preoperative patient selection is warranted particularly in elderly patients, in whom the hearing thresholds for EAS indication differ slightly from that in younger adults.