Comparison of Tonotopic and Default Frequency Fitting for Speech Understanding in Noise in New Cochlear Implantees: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind, Cross-Over Study

Objectives: While cochlear implants (CIs) have provided benefits for speech recognition in quiet for subjects with severe-to-profound hearing loss, speech recognition in noise remains challenging. A body of evidence suggests that reducing frequency-to-place mismatch may positively affect speech perception. Thus, a fitting method based on a tonotopic map may improve speech perception results in quiet and noise. The aim of our study was to assess the impact of a tonotopic map on speech perception in noise and quiet in new CI users. Design: A prospective, randomized, double-blind, two-period cross-over study in 26 new CI users was performed over a 6-month period. New CI users older than 18 years with bilateral severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss or complete hearing loss for less than 5 years were selected in the University Hospital Centre of Rennes in France. An anatomical tonotopic map was created using postoperative flat-panel computed tomography and a reconstruction software based on the Greenwood function. Each participant was randomized to receive a conventional map followed by a tonotopic map or vice versa. Each setting was maintained for 6 weeks, at the end of which participants performed speech perception tasks. The primary outcome measure was speech recognition in noise. Participants were allocated to sequences by block randomization of size two with a ratio 1:1 (CONSORT Guidelines). Participants and those assessing the outcomes were blinded to the intervention. Results: Thirteen participants were randomized to each sequence. Two of the 26 participants recruited (one in each sequence) had to be excluded due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Twenty-four participants were analyzed. Speech recognition in noise was significantly better with the tonotopic fitting at all signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) levels tested [SNR = +9 dB, p = 0.002, mean effect (ME) = 12.1%, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) = 4.9 to 19.2, standardized effect size (SES) = 0.71; SNR = +6 dB, p < 0.001, ME = 16.3%, 95% CI = 9.8 to 22.7, SES = 1.07; SNR = +3 dB, p < 0.001 ME = 13.8%, 95% CI = 6.9 to 20.6, SES = 0.84; SNR = 0 dB, p = 0.003, ME = 10.8%, 95% CI = 4.1 to 17.6, SES = 0.68]. Neither period nor interaction effects were observed for any signal level. Speech recognition in quiet ( p = 0.66) and tonal audiometry ( p = 0.203) did not significantly differ between the two settings. 92% of the participants kept the tonotopy-based map after the study period. No correlation was found between speech-in-noise perception and age, duration of hearing deprivation, angular insertion depth, or position or width of the frequency filters allocated to the electrodes. Conclusion: For new CI users, tonotopic fitting appears to be more efficient than the default frequency fitting because it allows for better speech recognition in noise without compromising understanding in quiet.