Skip to content

Comparison in New Cochlear Implanted Subjects of a Tonotopy-based Bimodal Fitting and a Conventional Fitting

Comparison of Speech Understanding Between a Tonotopy-based Bimodal Fitting and a Default Bimodal Fitting in Newly Cochlear-implanted Patients: a Double-blind Randomized Crossover Study.

Status
Recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT05955469
Enrollment
20
Registered
2023-07-21
Start date
2024-11-05
Completion date
2027-01-01
Last updated
2026-01-20

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Bilateral Hearing Loss, Sensorineural Hearing Loss, Bilateral

Keywords

Cochlear implant, Bimodal fitting, Anatomy-based fitting

Brief summary

Main objective: For a bimodal fitting (hearing aid (HA) + cochlear implant (CI)): Comparison of a tonotopy based fitting strategy (TFS4) to a default fitting strategy (FS4) for the speech recognition in noise. Secondary objectives: Comparison of TFS4 to FS4 for speech recognition in quiet. Comparison of TFS4 to FS4 for the auditory skills experienced by the subject.

Detailed description

Introduction: Cochlear implantation allows the rehabilitation of profound bilateral deafness, restoring speech perception and verbal communication when the traditional hearing aid no longer provides satisfactory hearing gain. A cochlear implant includes an electrode array and its functioning is based on the principle of cochlear tonotopy: Each electrode encodes a frequency spectrum according to its position in the cochlea (high frequencies are assigned to the basal electrodes and low frequencies to the apical electrodes). The cochlear implant thus breaks down the frequency spectrum into a number of frequency bands via bandpass filters corresponding to the number of electrodes in the implant. During the fitting these bands can be modified by the audiologist. Bimodal hearing refers to the use of a CI in one ear with a HA on the contralateral side. This association allows for adults and children a better perception of speech in quiet and in noise, a better perception of music, hearing comfort, better sound quality, better localization of sound and, consequently, a better quality of life compared to unilateral CI alone. However, there is great variability in the integration process; while some bimodal users show substantial benefits, others receive little or no benefit. This variability could be due to the mismatch of frequencies (tonotopic shift) between the CI and the contralateral HA. Recently MED-EL has developed an "anatomy-based fitting" (ABF) strategy based on the tonotopy that allows, from a postoperative scanner, to calculate the theoretical characteristic frequency of neurons stimulated by each electrode contact and to transmit this information to the fitting software of the CI. This strategy (TFS4) could therefore allow a better integration of information in bimodal hearing and in particular improve the speech recognition in noise compared to a default strategy (FS4). Main objective: For a bimodal fitting (hearing aid (HA) + cochlear implant (CI)): Comparison of a tonotopy based fitting strategy (TFS4) to a default fitting strategy (FS4) for the speech recognition in noise. Secondary objectives: Comparison of TFS4 to FS4 for speech recognition in quiet. Comparison of TFS4 to FS4 for the auditory skills experienced by the subject. Plan of the study: It is a prospective open monocentric randomized crossover study: Measures will be done on the patient at 6 weeks and 12 weeks post-activation.

Interventions

DEVICEFS4 then TFS4 (cochlear implant)

Cochlear implant with default fitting then with tonotopy-based fitting

DEVICETFS4 then FS4 (cochlear implant)

Cochlear implant with tonotopy-based fitting then with default fitting

Sponsors

MED-EL Elektromedizinische Geräte GesmbH
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
CROSSOVER
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Investigator)

Masking description

Double blind study: The patient and the Investigator don't know the fitting.

Intervention model description

Crossover Assignment Two arms A and B: Arm A: Bimodal patient's fitting with default fitting (FS4) --\> 6 weeks use --\> tests and bimodal patient's fitting with tonotopy-based fitting (TFS4) --\> 6 weeks use --\> tests; Arm B: Bimodal patient's fitting with TFS4 --\> 6 weeks use --\> tests and bimodal patient's fitting with FS4 --\> 6 weeks use --\> tests

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Adult patient (\>= 18 years old) speaking French * Patient who fulfils the criteria for cochlear implantation

Exclusion criteria

* retro-cochlear pathology: auditory neuropathy, vestibular schwannoma * patient with residual hearing \< 70 dB hearing level (HL) at 500 Hz and 1000 Hz on the contralateral ear

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Speech recognition in noiseat 6 weeks post-activationThe speech recognition in noise is evaluated with the French Matrix test (Framatrix) \[S. Jansen et al. Comparison of three types of French speech-in-noise tests: a multi-center study. Int J Audiol, 51 (3) (2012), pp. 164-173\].

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Speech recognition in quietat 6 weeks post-activationCochlear list of Lafon: list of 51 phonems (17 words). Speech recognition score on 50.
Auditory skills experienced by the patientat 6 weeks post-activationAuditory skills experienced by the patient are evaluated with the short form of the French version of the speech spatial qualities scale (SSQ) with of 15 questions describing various real-world auditory situations \[Moulin et al. Ear \& Hearing 2019;40;938-950\].

Countries

France

Contacts

CONTACTVincent Péan, PhD
vincent.pean@medel.com0603592974
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORAlexandre Karkas, Pr

Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Saint Etienne

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026