Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Bilateral Cochlear Implants or Bimodal Hearing for Children with Bilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss

  • Hearing Loss in Children (D Horn and H Ou, Section Editors)
  • Published:
Current Otorhinolaryngology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

This review describes speech perception and language outcomes for children using bimodal hearing (cochlear implant (CI) plus contralateral hearing aid (HA)) as compared to children with bilateral CIs and contrasts said findings with the adult literature. There is a lack of clinical evidence driving recommendations for bimodal versus bilateral CI candidacy and as such, clinicians are often unsure about when to recommend a second CI for children with residual acoustic hearing. Thus, the goal of this review is to identify scientific information that may influence clinical decision making for pediatric CI candidates with residual acoustic hearing.

Recent Findings

Bilateral CIs are considered standard of care for children with bilateral severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss. For children with aidable acoustic hearing—even in just the low frequencies—an early period of bimodal stimulation has been associated with significantly better speech perception, vocabulary, and language development. HA audibility, however, is generally poorer than that offered by a CI resulting in interaural asymmetry in auditory access, speech perception, head shadow, as well as brainstem and cortical activity and development. Thus, there is a need to optimize “two-eared” hearing while maximizing a child’s potential with respect to hearing, speech, and language while ensuring that we limit asymmetrically driven auditory neuroplasticity. A recent large study of bimodal and bilateral CI users suggested that a period of bimodal stimulation was only beneficial for children with a better-ear pure tone average (PTA) ≤ 73 dB HL. This 73-dB-HL cutoff applied even to children who ultimately received bilateral CIs.

Summary

Though we do not yet have definitive guidelines for determining bimodal versus bilateral CI candidacy, there is increasing evidence that (1) bilateral CIs yield superior outcomes for children with bilateral severe-to-profound hearing loss and (2) an early period of bimodal stimulation is beneficial for speech perception and language development, but only for children with better-ear PTA ≤ 73 dB HL. For children with residual acoustic hearing, even in just the low-frequency range, rapid sequential bilateral cochlear implantation following a trial period with bimodal stimulation will yield best outcomes for auditory, language, and academic development. Of course, there is also an increasing prevalence of cochlear implantation with acoustic hearing preservation allowing for combined electric and acoustic stimulation even following bilateral implantation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. CMS. National coverage determination for cochlear implantation 100–3 50.3 [Internet]. 100–03. 2005. Available from: https://www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-Guidance/Guidance/Transmittals/Downloads/R42NCD.pdf. June 29, 2020.

  2. Cochlear. [Nucleus cochlear implants: physician’s package insert]. 2019.

  3. Cochlear [Nucleus Hybrid L24 Cochlear Implant CI24REH Professional Package Insert]. 2014. Available from: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf13/P130016c.pdf

  4. MED-EL. MED-EL EAS System [Internet]. 2016. Available from: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf/p000025s084b.pdf

  5. Holder JT, Reynolds SM, Sunderhaus LW, Gifford RH. Current profile of adults presenting for preoperative cochlear implant evaluation. Trends Hear. 2018;22:1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cochlear [Nucleus 24 Contour Cochlear Implant System, Package Insert]. 2000.

  7. Carlson ML, Sladen DP, Haynes DS, Driscoll CLW, DeJong DMD, Erickson HC, et al. Evidence for the expansion of pediatric cochlear implant candidacy. Otol Neurotol. 2015;36(1):43–50.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Leigh JR, Dettman SJ, Dowell RC. Evidence-based guidelines for recommending cochlear implantation for young children: Audiological criteria and optimizing age at implantation. Int J Audiol [Internet]. 2016;55 Suppl 2(sup2):S9–S18. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3109/14992027.2016.1146415%5Cn, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27142630

  9. Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez JG, Conde. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)–a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform 2009;42(2):377–381.

  10. Park LR, Teagle HFB, Gagnon E, Woodard J, Brown KD. Electric-acoustic stimulation outcomes in children. Ear Hear. 2019;40(4):849–57.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kuthubutheen J, Hedne CN, Krishnaswamy J, Rajan GP. A case series of paediatric hearing preservation cochlear implantation: a new treatment modality for children with drug-induced or congenital partial deafness. Audiol Neurotol. 2012;17(5):321–30.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Bruce IA, Felton M, Lockley M, Melling C, Lloyd SK, Freeman SR, et al. Hearing preservation cochlear implantation in adolescents. Otol Neurotol. 2014;35(9):1552–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Carlson ML, Patel NS, Tombers NM, DeJong MD, Breneman AI, Neff BA, et al. Hearing preservation in pediatric cochlear implantation. Otol Neurotol. 2017;38(6):e128–33.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Meredith MA, Rubinstein JT, Sie KCY, Norton SJ. Cochlear implantation in children with postlingual progressive steeply sloping high-frequency hearing loss. J Am Acad Audiol. 2017;28(913–919).

  15. Brown RF, Hullar TE, Cadieux JH, Chole RA. Residual hearing preservation after pediatric cochlear implantation. Otol Neurotol. 2010;31(8):1221–6.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Skarzynski H, Lorens A, Piotrowska A, Anderson I. Partial deafness cochlear implantation in children. Int Joural Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2007;71(9):1407–13.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Skarzynski H, Lorens A. Electric acoustic stimulation in children. Adv Otorhinolaryngol. 2010;67:135–43.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Svrakic M, Roland JTJ, McMenomey SO, Svirsky MA. Initial operative experience and short-term hearing preservation results with a mid-scala Cochlear implant electrode Array. Otol Neurotol. 2016;37(10):1549–54.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Manjaly JG, Nash R, Ellis W, Britz A, Lavy JA, Shaida A, et al. Hearing preservation with standard length electrodes in pediatric cochlear implantation. Otol Neurotol. 2018;39(9):1109–14.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Dalbert A, Huber A, Baumann N, Veraguth D, Roosli C, Pfiffner F. Hearing preservation after cochlear implantation may improve long-term word perception in the electric-only condition. Otol Neurotol [Internet]. 2016;37(9):1314–9 Available from: http://content.wkhealth.com/linkback/openurl?sid=WKPTLP:landingpage&an=00129492-201610000-00018.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Carlson ML, Driscoll CLW, Gifford RH, Service GJ, Tombers NM, Hughes-Borst BJ, et al. Implications of minimizing trauma during conventional cochlear implantation. Otol Neurotol. 2011;32(6):962–8.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Attias J, Ulanovski D, Hilly O, Greenstein T, Solokov M, HabibAllah S, et al. Postoperative intracochlear electrocochleography in pediatric cochlear implant recipients: association to audiometric thresholds and auditory performance. Ear Hear. 2020; 2020 Jan 2(epub ahead of print).

  23. Gifford RH, Dorman MF, Sheffield SW, Teece K, Olund AP. Availability of binaural cues for bilateral implant recipients and bimodal listeners with and without preserved hearing in the implanted ear. Audiol Neurotol. 2014;19(1):57–71.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Gifford RH, Dorman MF. Bimodal hearing or bilateral cochlear implants? Ask the Patient Ear Hear. 2019;40(3):501–16.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Illg A, Bojanowicz M, Lesinki-Schiedet A, Lenarz T, Buchner A. Evaluation of the bimodal benefit in a large cohort of cochlear implant subjects using a contralateral hearing aid. Otol Neurotol. 2014;35:e240–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Crew JD, Galvin JJ, Fu QJ. Perception of sung speech in bimodal Cochlear implant users. Trends Hear. 2016;20:2331216516669329.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Neuman AC, Waltzman SB, Shapiro WH, Neukam JD, Zeman AM, Svirsky MA. Self-reported usage, functional benefit, and audiologic characteristics of cochlear implant patients who use a contralateral hearing aid. Trends Hear. 2017;21:1014.

    Google Scholar 

  28. D’Onofrio KL, Caldwell M, Limb C, Smith S, Kessler DM, Gifford RH. Musical emotion perception in bimodal patients: relative weighting of musical mode and tempo cues. Front Neurosci. 2020;14:114.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Kessler DM, Wolfe J, Blanchard M, Gifford RH. Clinical application of spectral modulation detection: speech recognition benefit for combining a cochlear implant and contralateral hearing aid. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2020;63(5):1561–71.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. • Davidson LS, Geers AE, Uchanski RM, Firszt JB. Effects of early acoustic hearing on speech perception and language for pediatric cochlear implant recipients. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2019;62:3620–37 The results of this study showed that although children with bilateral moderate-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss may ultimately benefit from bilateral CIs, having a short period of bimodal stimulation of no greater than 3.5 years was significantly related to higher speech perception and receptive language.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Choi JE, Moon IJ, Kim EY, Park HS, Kim BK, Chung WH, et al. Sound localization and speech perception in noise of pediatric cochlear implant recipients: bimodal fitting versus bilateral cochlear implants. Ear Hear. 2017;38(4):426–40.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Davidson LS, Firszt JB, Brenner J, Cadieux JH. Evaluation of hearing aid frequency response fittings in pediatric and young adult bimodal recipients. J Am Acad Audiol. 2015;26(4):393–407.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Cheng X, Liu Y, Wang B, Yuan Y, Galvin JJ, Fu QJ, et al. The benefits of residual hair cell function for speech and music perception in pediatric bimodal cochlear implant listeners. Neural Plast. 2018;2018:4610592.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Driscoll VD, Welhaven AE, Gfeller K, Oleson J, Olszewski CP. Music perception of adolescents using electroacoustic hearing. Otol Neurotol. 2016;37(2):e141–7.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Potts LG, Litovsky RY. Transitioning from bimodal to bilateral cochlear implant listening: speech recognition and localization in four individuals. Am J Audiol. 2014;23(1):79–92.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Dorman MF, Loiselle LH, Cook SJ, Yost WA, Gifford RH. Sound source localization by normal- hearing listeners, hearing-impaired listeners and cochlear implant listeners. Audiol Neurotol. 2016;21:127–31.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Potts LG, Skinner MW, Litovsky RY, Strube MJ, Kuk F. Recognition and localization of speech by adult cochlear implant recipients wearing a digital hearing aid in the nonimplanted ear (bimodal hearing). J Am Acad Audiol. 2009;20:353–73.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Berrettini S, Passetti S, Giannarelli M, Forli F. Benefit from bimodal hearing in a group of prelingually deafened adult cochlear implant users. Am J Otolaryngol. 2010;31(5):332–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Litovsky R, Parkinson A, Arcaroli J, Sammeth C. Simultaneous bilateral cochlear implantation in adults: a multicenter clinical study. Ear Hear. 2006;27(6):714–31.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Buss E, Pillsbury HC, Buchman CA, Pillsbury CH, Clark MS, Haynes DS, et al. Multicenter US bilateral MED-EL cochlear implantation study: speech perception over the first year of use. Ear Hear. 2008;29(1):20–32.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Sheffield SWW, Haynes DSS, Wanna GBB, Labadie RFF, Gifford RHH, Dorman MF, et al. Availability of binaural cues for pediatric bilateral cochlear implant recipients. J Am Acad Audiol. 2015;26(3):289–98.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Asp F, Mäki-Torkko E, Karltorp E, Harder H, Hergils L, Eskilsson G, et al. Bilateral versus unilateral cochlear implants in children: speech recognition, sound localization, and parental reports. Int J Audiol. 2012;51(11):817–32.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Gordon KA, Papsin BC. Benefits of short interimplant delays in children receiving bilateral cochlear implants. Otol Neurotol. 2009;30(3):319–31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Gordon K, Wong D, Papsin B. Bilateral input protects the cortex from unilaterally driven reorganization in children who are deaf. Brain. 2013;136(Pt 5):1609–25.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Gordon K, Henkin Y, Kral A. Asymmetric hearing during development: the aural preference syndrome and treatment options. Pediatrics [Internet]. 2015;136(1):141–53. Available from:. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2014-3520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Polonenko MJ, Papsin BC, Gordon KA. The effects of asymmetric hearing on bilateral brainstem function: findings in children with bimodal (electric and acoustic) hearing. Audiol Neurootol. 2015;20(Suppl 1):13–20.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Gordon KA, Jiwani S, Papsin BC. What is the optimal timing for bilateral cochlear implantation in children? Cochlear Implants Int. 2011;12(Suppl 2):S8–14.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Lammers MJW, Venekamp RP, Grolman W, van der Heijden GJMG. Bilateral cochlear implantation in children and the impact of the inter-implant interval. Laryngoscope. 2014;124(4):993–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Strøm-Roum H, Laurent C, Wie OB. Comparison of bilateral and unilateral cochlear implants in children with sequential surgery. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2012;76(1):95–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. •• Polonenko MJ, Papsin BC, Gordon KA. Limiting asymmetric hearing improves benefits of bilateral hearing in children using cochlear implants. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):13201 Results from this study reveal that bimodal listeners and sequential bilateral CI users with inter-implant delays > 1 year are at greatest risk for interaural asymmetry in speech recognition performance, spatial unmasking, and binaural summation.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Gifford RH, Driscoll CLW, Davis TJ, Fiebig P, Micco A, Dorman MF. A within-subject comparison of bimodal hearing, bilateral cochlear implantation, and bilateral cochlear implantation with bilateral hearing preservation: high-performing patients. Otol Neurotol. 2015;36(8):1331–7.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Cullington HE, Zeng FG. Comparison of bimodal and bilateral cochlear implant users on speech recognition with competing talker, music perception, affective prosody discrimination and talker identification. Ear Hear. 2011;32(1):16–30.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  53. Loiselle LH, Dorman F, Yost WA, Gifford H. Sound source localization by hearing preservation patients with and without symmetrical low-frequency acoustic hearing 2015;166–171.

  54. Yoon Y-S, Shin Y-R, Gho J-S, Fu Q-J. Bimodal benefit depends on the performance difference between a cochlear implant and a hearing aid. Cochlear Implants Int. 2015;16(3):159–67.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Luntz M, Egra-Dagan D, Attias J, Yehudai N, Most T, Shpak T. From hearing with a cochlear implant and a contralateral hearing aid (CI/HA) to hearing with two cochlear implants (CI/CI): a within-subject design comparison. Otol Neurotol [Internet]. 2014:1–9 Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25275862.

  56. Au A, Dowell RC. Evidence-based recommendation for bilateral cochlear implantation in adults. Am J Audiol. 2019;28:775–82.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Van Hoesel RJM. Contrasting benefits from contralateral implants and hearing aids in cochlear implant users. Hear Res [Internet]. 2012;288(1–2):100–13. Available from. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2011.11.014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Gifford RH, Loiselle L, Natale S, Sheffield SW, Sunderhaus LW, Dietrich MS, et al. Speech understanding in noise for adults with cochlear implants: effects of hearing configuration, source location certainty, and head movement. J Speech, Lang Hear Res. 2018;61(5):1306–21.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Deep NL, Green JE, Chen S, Shapiro WH, McMenomey SO, Roland TJ, et al. From bimodal hearing to sequential bilateral cochlear implantation in children—a within-subject comparison. Otol Neurotol. 2020;41:767–74.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Ching TY, van Wanrooy E, Dillon H. Binaural-bimodal fitting or bilateral implantation for managing severe to profound deafness: a review. Trends Amplif. 2007;11:161–92.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Lotfi Y, Hasanalifard M, Moossavi A, Bakhski E, Ajaloueyan M. Binaural hearing advantages for children with bimodal fitting. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2019;121:58–63.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Dhondt CMC, Swinnen FKR, Dhooge IJM. Bilateral cochlear implantation or bimodal listening in the paediatric population: retrospective analysis of decisive criteria. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2018;104:170–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Dorman MF, Cook SJ, Yost WA, Wanna B, Gifford RH. Interaural level difference cues determine sound source localization by single-sided deaf patients fit with a cochlear implant. 2015;20:183–8.

  64. Goupell MJ, Stakhovskaya OA, Bernstein JGW. Contralateral interference caused by binaurally presented competing speech in adult bilateral cochlear-implant users. Ear Hear. 2018;39:110–23.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  65. Culling JF, Jelfs S, Talbert A, Grange JA, Backhouse SS. The benefit of bilateral versus unilateral cochlear implantation to speech intelligibility in noise. Ear Hear. 2012;33(6):673–82.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Ching TYC, Incerti P, Hill M. Binaural benefits for adults who use hearing aids and cochlear implants in opposite ears. Ear Hear [Internet]. 2004;25(1):9–21 Available from: isi:000188996200002.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Dunn CC, Tyler RS, Witt SA. Benefit of wearing a hearing aid on the unimplanted ear in adult users of a cochlear implant. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2005;48(3):668–80.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Morera C, Manrique M, Ramos A, Garcia-Ibanez L, Cavalle L, Huarte 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 Otolaryngol. 2005;125(6):596–606.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Pyschny V, Landwehr M, Hahn M, Lang-Roth R, Walger M, Meister H. Head shadow, squelch, and summation effects with an energetic or informational masker in bilateral and bimodal CI user. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2014;57:1942–60.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Grantham DW, Ashmead DH, Ricketts TA, Labadie RF, Haynes DS. Horizontal-plane localization of noise and speech signals by postlingually deafened adults fitted with bilateral cochlear implants. Ear Hear. 2007;28(4):524–41.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Mok M, Galvin KL, Dowell RC, McKay CM. Speech perception benefit for children with a cochlear implant and a hearing aid in opposite ears and children with bilateral cochlear implants. Audiol Neurotol. 2010;15(1):44–56.

    Google Scholar 

  72. D’Alessandro HD, Sennaroglu G, Yücel E, Belgin E, Mancini P. Binaural squelch and head shadow effects in children with unilateral cochlear implants and contralateral hearing aids. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2015;35:343–9.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Ching TYC, Day J, Van Buynder P, Hou S, Zhang V, Seeto M, et al. Language and speech perception of young children with bimodal fitting or bilateral cochlear implants. Cochlear Implants Int. 2014;15:S43–6.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  74. Moberly AC, Lowenstein JH, Nittrouer S. Early Bimodal Stimulation Benefits Language Acquisition for Children With Cochlear Implants. Otol {&} Neurotol Off Publ Am Otol Soc Am Neurotol Soc [and] Eur Acad Otol Neurotol. 2016;37(1):24–30.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Yawn RJ, O’Connell BP, Dwyer RT, Sunderhaus LW, Reynolds S, Haynes DS, et al. Bilateral cochlear implantation versus bimodal hearing in patients with functional residual hearing: a within-subjects comparison of audiologic performance and quality of life. Otol Neurotol. 2018;39(4):422–7.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  76. Kral A, Heid S, Hubka P, Tillein J. Unilateral hearing during development: hemispheric specificity in plastic reorganizations. Front Syst Neurosci. 2013;7(93):1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Kral A, Hubka P, Heid S, Tillein J. Single-sided deafness leads to unilateral aural preference within an early sensitive period. Brain. 2013;136(Pt1):180–93.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Popescu MV, Polley DB. Monaural deprivation disrupts development of binaural selectivity in auditory midbrain and cortex. Neuron. 2010;65(5):718–31.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Polley DB, Thompson JH, Guo W. Brief hearing loss disrupts binaural integration during two early critical periods of auditory cortex development. Nat Commun. 2013;4(2547):1–30.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Keating P, King AJ. Developmental plasticity of spatial hearing following asymmetric hearing loss: context-dependent cue integration and its clinical implications. Front Syst Neurosci. 2013;7(123):1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Gordon KA, Wong DDE, Papsin BC. Cortical function in children receiving bilateral cochlear implants simultaneously or after a period of Interimplant delay. Otol Neurotol. 2010;31:1293–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Illg A, Sandner C, Büchner A, Lenarz T, Kral A, Lesinski-Schiedat A. The optimal inter-implant interval in pediatric sequential bilateral implantation. Hear Res. 2019;372:80–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Jang JH, Roh JM, Choo OS, Kim YJ, Kim H, Park HY, et al. Critical factors for binaural hearing in children with bilateral sequential cochlear implantation: first implant performance and inter-implant interval. Audiol Neuro-Otology. 2019;24:174–82.

    Google Scholar 

  84. Fitzgerald MB, Green JE, Fang Y, Waltzman SB. Factors influencing consistent device use in pediatric recipients of bilateral cochlear implants. Cochlear Implants Int. 2013;14(5):254–65.

    Google Scholar 

  85. Reeder RM, Firszt JB, Cadieux JH, Strube MJ. A longitudinal study in children with sequential bilateral cochlear implants: time course for the second implanted ear and bilateral performance. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2017;60:276–87.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  86. Illg A, Giourgas A, Kral A, Büchner A, Lesinski-Schiedat A, Lenarz T. Speech comprehension in children and adolescents after sequential bilateral cochlear implantation with long interimplant interval. Otol Neurotol. 2013;34:682–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Niparko JK, Tobey EA, Thal DJ, Eisenberg LS, Wang N-Y, Quittner AL, et al. Spoken language development in children following cochlear implantation. J Am Med Assoc. 2010;303(15):1498–506.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  88. Tobey, E. A., Thal, D., Niparko, J. K., Eisenberg, L. S., Quittner, A. L., Wang NY. Influence of implantation age on school-age language performance in pediatric cochlear implant users. Int J Audiol 2013;52(4):219–229.

  89. Dettman SJ, Dowell RC, Choo D, Arnott W, Abrahams Y, Davis A, et al. Long-term communication outcomes for children receiving Cochlear implants younger than 12 months. Otol Neurotol. 2016;37(2):e82–95.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Boons T, Brokx JPL, Frijns JHM, Peeraer L, Philips B, Vermeulen A, et al. Effect of pediatric bilateral cochlear implantation on language development. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2012;166(1):28–34.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Sarant J, Harris D, Bennet L, Bant S. Bilateral versus unilateral cochlear implants in children: a study of spoken language outcomes. Ear Hear. 2014;35(4):396–409.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  92. Nittrouer S, Chapman C. The effects of bilateral electric and bimodal electric–acoustic stimulation on language development. Trends Amplif. 2009;13(3):190–205.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  93. Nittrouer S, Caldwell A, Lowenstein JH, Tarr E, Holloman C. Emergent literacy in kindergartners with cochlear implants. Ear Hear. 2012;33(6):683–97.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  94. • Nittrouer S, Muir M, Tietgens K, Moberly AC, Lowenstein JH. Development of phonological, lexical, and syntactic abilities in children with cochlear implants across the elementary grades. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2018;61(10):2561–77 The results of this study showed prior bimodal hearing experience—even if a child ultimately received bilateral CIs—was significantly associated with better phonological, lexical, and morphosyntactic skills in a group of 6th graders.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The author would like to express thanks to Linsey Sunderhaus, Au.D., for organizing digital copies of the original studies included in this review.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1215 21st Avenue South, 9302 MCE South, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA

    René H. Gifford

Authors
  1. René H. Gifford
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to René H. Gifford.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The author is a consultant for Advanced Bionics, Cochlear, and a member of the clinical advisory board for Frequency Therapeutics.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical collection on Hearing Loss in Children

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gifford, R.H. Bilateral Cochlear Implants or Bimodal Hearing for Children with Bilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss. Curr Otorhinolaryngol Rep 8, 385–394 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40136-020-00314-6

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40136-020-00314-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation