• Home
  • Practice Focus
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
    • How I Do It
    • TRIO Best Practices
  • Business of Medicine
    • Health Policy
    • Legal Matters
    • Practice Management
    • Tech Talk
    • AI
  • Literature Reviews
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
  • Career
    • Medical Education
    • Professional Development
    • Resident Focus
  • ENT Perspectives
    • ENT Expressions
    • Everyday Ethics
    • From TRIO
    • The Great Debate
    • Letter From the Editor
    • Rx: Wellness
    • The Voice
    • Viewpoint
  • TRIO Resources
    • Triological Society
    • The Laryngoscope
    • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
    • TRIO Combined Sections Meetings
    • COSM
    • Related Otolaryngology Events
  • Search

Cochlear Implants: Changing Indications and New Technology

by Nikki Kean • November 9, 2017

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
Print-Friendly Version

In an attempt to improve the criteria for cochlear implants, a group of experts met in 2011 and modified the battery of tests used to determine implant candidacy to better reflect real-world experiences (J Acoust Soc Am. 1994;95:1085–1099; Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2004;130:624–628). The AzBio Sentence Test, which replaced the HINT test, uses both male and female voices speaking in normal cadence and is conducted with and without background noise. “These tests help clinicians quantify the candidates’ functional hearing before implantation, and are also important for measuring post-implant outcomes,” Dr. Blackburn explained.

You Might Also Like

  • Changing Indications and New Technologies for Cochlear Implants
  • Audiologists Miss Many Candidates for Cochlear Implants
  • Issues Surrounding Cochlear Implants for Certain Patients with Hearing Loss
  • Double Benefit? The case for bilateral cochlear implants
Explore This Issue
November 2017

“There are ongoing studies through the American Cochlear Implant Alliance, where we are working together with CMS to expand their criteria for people with more residual hearing,” said Craig A. Buchman, MD, Lindburg Professor and chair in the department of otolaryngology-head and neck surgery at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis.

Most guidelines recommend cochlear implants starting at one year for children with severe bilateral hearing loss, but some centers perform implants earlier (at nine months of age). There is no upper age limit for implantation, according to experts. As long as a patient fits candidacy criteria and is deemed medically fit for general anesthesia and surgery, he or she is considered a candidate. The procedure usually takes between one and two hours, with the patient typically sent home that day. Dr. Tucci recently implanted a 94-year-old man “who is sharp as a tack and doing beautifully.”

A recent study by Mudery and colleagues found that older adults (those with an average age of 73 years) had a 71% improvement in AzBio scores in quiet and a 51% point improvement in noise on the implanted ear. When hearing was measured on both sides, the researchers found bilateral hearing improved 23% points in quiet and 27% points in noise (Otol Neurotol. 2017;38:187-191). They concluded, “All patients undergoing CI candidacy testing should be tested in both quiet and noise conditions. For those who qualify only in noise, our results demonstrate that cochlear implantation typically improves hearing both in quiet and noise.”

Bilateral versus Unilateral CIs

Part of the confusion over the guidelines is whether to place one or two cochlear implants in patients with bilateral hearing loss. Some of these decisions come down to cost.

“The medical profession is very aware of the need for bilateral hearing. We have been saying this for years with regards to hearing aids—you need two ears. But for some reason, it has taken us longer to begin that conversation with cochlear implants,” Dr. Blackburn noted. “There is an auditory perceptual advantage to hearing bilaterally. The brain is more efficient at filtering out background noise when auditory information is received from both sides.”

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Single Page

Filed Under: Home Slider, Special Reports Tagged With: clinical best practices, cochlear implants, hearing loss, residual hearing, treatmentsIssue: November 2017

You Might Also Like:

  • Changing Indications and New Technologies for Cochlear Implants
  • Audiologists Miss Many Candidates for Cochlear Implants
  • Issues Surrounding Cochlear Implants for Certain Patients with Hearing Loss
  • Double Benefit? The case for bilateral cochlear implants

The Triological SocietyENTtoday is a publication of The Triological Society.

Polls

Do you use AI-powered scribes for documentation?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Polls Archive

Top Articles for Residents

  • Applications Open for Resident Members of ENTtoday Edit Board
  • How To Provide Helpful Feedback To Residents
  • Call for Resident Bowl Questions
  • New Standardized Otolaryngology Curriculum Launching July 1 Should Be Valuable Resource For Physicians Around The World
  • Do Training Programs Give Otolaryngology Residents the Necessary Tools to Do Productive Research?
  • Popular this Week
  • Most Popular
  • Most Recent
    • How to: Positioning for Middle Cranial Fossa Repair of Superior Semicircular Canal Dehiscence

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Endoscopic Ear Surgery: Advancements and Adoption Challenges 

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Complications for When Physicians Change a Maiden Name

    • The Importance of Time Away
    • Endoscopic Ear Surgery: Advancements and Adoption Challenges 
    • Reflections from a Past President of the Triological Society
    • ENT Surgeons Explore the Benefits and Challenges of AI-Powered Scribes: Revolutionizing Documentation in Healthcare
    • How To: Open Expansion Laryngoplasty for Combined Glottic and Subglottic Stenosis

Follow Us

  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Advertise
  • The Triological Society
  • The Laryngoscope
  • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookies

Wiley

Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1559-4939