HYPOTHESIS: To refine and extend the knowledge on cortical plasticity in single-sided deafness (SSD) by assessing magnetoencephalographic imaging in a well-defined group of subjects. BACKGROUND: SSD causes difficulties with directional hearing, signal extraction in noise, and multispeaker identification and separation. In SSD, the ipsilateral auditory cortex is never powerfully driven by sound, which may lead to plastic change and contribute to higher-order psychoacoustic dysfunction beyond loss of a peripheral sound sensor. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional study on 12 subjects with long-term, adult-onset, nontraumatic SSD and 12 normal-hearing controls was conducted using magnetoencephalographic imaging, magnetic resonance imaging, and validated hearing instruments. Pure-tone stimuli at five frequencies were presented to each hearing ear individually. M100 activation peak times of the ipsilateral and contralateral auditory cortices were analyzed. RESULTS: Controls showed an M100 interhemispheric mean latency difference of 6.6 milliseconds. In contrast, subjects with SSD exhibited a mean of 1.7 milliseconds. This loss of interhemispheric latency difference was statistically significant (p < 0.05, analysis of variance with repeated measures). SSD subjects confirmed degraded hearing function on both Hearing Handicap Inventory for Adults (p < 0.001) and Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale instruments (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: SSD disrupts M100 latency difference between the two hemispheres to sound stimulation. This finding may represent maladaptive temporal cortical plasticity because of loss of a peripheral sensor. Based on this premise, a new generation of neurophysiologically inspired auditory treatments to correct or mitigate central consequences of SSD may be considered to optimize hearing in individuals with only one functional ear.
HYPOTHESIS: To refine and extend the knowledge on cortical plasticity in single-sided deafness (SSD) by assessing magnetoencephalographic imaging in a well-defined group of subjects. BACKGROUND: SSD causes difficulties with directional hearing, signal extraction in noise, and multispeaker identification and separation. In SSD, the ipsilateral auditory cortex is never powerfully driven by sound, which may lead to plastic change and contribute to higher-order psychoacoustic dysfunction beyond loss of a peripheral sound sensor. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional study on 12 subjects with long-term, adult-onset, nontraumatic SSD and 12 normal-hearing controls was conducted using magnetoencephalographic imaging, magnetic resonance imaging, and validated hearing instruments. Pure-tone stimuli at five frequencies were presented to each hearing ear individually. M100 activation peak times of the ipsilateral and contralateral auditory cortices were analyzed. RESULTS: Controls showed an M100 interhemispheric mean latency difference of 6.6 milliseconds. In contrast, subjects with SSD exhibited a mean of 1.7 milliseconds. This loss of interhemispheric latency difference was statistically significant (p < 0.05, analysis of variance with repeated measures). SSD subjects confirmed degraded hearing function on both Hearing Handicap Inventory for Adults (p < 0.001) and Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale instruments (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: SSD disrupts M100 latency difference between the two hemispheres to sound stimulation. This finding may represent maladaptive temporal cortical plasticity because of loss of a peripheral sensor. Based on this premise, a new generation of neurophysiologically inspired auditory treatments to correct or mitigate central consequences of SSD may be considered to optimize hearing in individuals with only one functional ear.
Authors: J Thomas Roland; Craig Buchman; Laurie Eisenberg; Lillian Henderson; Shuman He; Jill Firszt; Howard Francis; Camille Dunn; Doug Sladen; Susan Arndt; Bradford May; Daniel Zeitler; John K Niparko; Susan Emmett; Debara Tucci; Joseph Chen; Amy McConkey Robbins; Ernest Schwefler; Ann Geers; Amy Lederberg; Heather Hayes; Michelle Hughes; Julie Bierer; Erin Schafer; Donna Sorkin; Linda Kozma-Spytek; Tina Childress Journal: Cochlear Implants Int Date: 2016-09-16
Authors: Emily Buss; Margaret T Dillon; Meredith A Rooth; English R King; Ellen J Deres; Craig A Buchman; Harold C Pillsbury; Kevin D Brown Journal: Trends Hear Date: 2018 Jan-Dec Impact factor: 3.293
Authors: Christine Poncet-Wallet; Elisabeth Mamelle; Benoit Godey; Eric Truy; Nicolas Guevara; Marine Ardoint; Dan Gnansia; Michel Hoen; Sonia Saaï; Isabelle Mosnier; Emmanuel Lescanne; David Bakhos; Christophe Vincent Journal: Otol Neurotol Date: 2020-04 Impact factor: 2.619
Authors: Jolie L Chang; Ethan D Crawford; Abhishek S Bhutada; Jennifer Henderson Sabes; Jessie Chen; Chang Cai; Corby L Dale; Anne M Findlay; Danielle Mizuiri; Srikantan S Nagarajan; Steven W Cheung Journal: Ear Hear Date: 2021 Sep/Oct Impact factor: 3.570