Impact of Anatomy-Based Cochlear Implant Programming on Early Performance

NCT ID: NCT06734039

Last Updated: 2025-10-01

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

ENROLLING_BY_INVITATION

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

50 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2025-10-31

Study Completion Date

2028-10-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of different audio processor frequency settings on performance outcomes in new cochlear implant users using electric-only stimulation in the implanted ear with normal hearing to moderately severe hearing loss in the opposite ear.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Participants will be randomized into a starting frequency setting at device activation or shortly after device activation for the first three months of device use. After 3 months listening experience, participants will be randomized into different frequency settings and tested before and after a period of listening experience. Participant outcomes for each of the multiple frequency settings will be evaluated using standard clinical speech testing and through questionnaires designed to capture information about patient sound quality and quality of life.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Hearing Loss, Unilateral Cochlear Implants Hearing Loss, Sensorineural Single-Sided Deafness (SSD) Asymmetric Hearing Loss

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

CROSSOVER

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

SINGLE

Participants
Participants will be blinded to each of the frequency settings they are utilizing.

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Default Clinical Frequency Setting

The audio processor frequency setting will be programmed based on current frequency defaults in the clinical programming software

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Programming of cochlear implant audio processor frequency settings

Intervention Type DEVICE

Cochlear implant audio processor frequency settings will be adjusted within the clinical programming software

Default Anatomy-Based Fitting

The audio processor frequency setting will be programmed based on current anatomy-based fitting frequency defaults in the clinical programming software

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Programming of cochlear implant audio processor frequency settings

Intervention Type DEVICE

Cochlear implant audio processor frequency settings will be adjusted within the clinical programming software

Experimental Anatomy-Based Fitting 1

The audio processor frequency setting will be programmed using experimental settings for anatomy-based fitting using individual anatomical information obtained from analysis of post-operative imaging.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Programming of cochlear implant audio processor frequency settings

Intervention Type DEVICE

Cochlear implant audio processor frequency settings will be adjusted within the clinical programming software

Experimental Anatomy-Based Fitting 2

The audio processor frequency setting will be programmed with experimental settings for anatomy-based fitting using individual anatomical information obtained from analysis of post-operative imaging.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Programming of cochlear implant audio processor frequency settings

Intervention Type DEVICE

Cochlear implant audio processor frequency settings will be adjusted within the clinical programming software

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Programming of cochlear implant audio processor frequency settings

Cochlear implant audio processor frequency settings will be adjusted within the clinical programming software

Intervention Type DEVICE

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

anatomy-based fitting

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Subjects who receive a cochlear implant in the contralateral ear prior to the 12-month interval
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Med-El Corporation

INDUSTRY

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Katelyn Glassman, AuD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Med-El Corporation

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

University of Kansas Medical Center

Kansas City, Kansas, United States

Site Status

University of North Carolina

Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States

Site Status

MED-EL Corporation

Durham, North Carolina, United States

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

United States

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Shannon CM, Schvartz-Leyzac KC, Dubno JR, McRackan TR. Determinants of Cochlear Implant Satisfaction and Decisional Regret in Adult Cochlear Implant Users. Otol Neurotol. 2023 Dec 1;44(10):e722-e729. doi: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000004028. Epub 2023 Oct 19.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 37853774 (View on PubMed)

Sturm JJ, Ma C, McRackan TR, Schvartz-Leyzac KC. Frequency-to-Place Mismatch Impacts Cochlear Implant Quality of Life, But Not Speech Recognition. Laryngoscope. 2024 Jun;134(6):2898-2905. doi: 10.1002/lary.31264. Epub 2024 Jan 12.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 38214299 (View on PubMed)

Kurz A, Herrmann D, Muller-Graff FT, Voelker J, Hackenberg S, Rak K. Anatomy-based fitting improves speech perception in noise for cochlear implant recipients with single-sided deafness. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2025 Jan;282(1):467-479. doi: 10.1007/s00405-024-08984-4. Epub 2024 Sep 19.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 39299967 (View on PubMed)

Fan X, Yang T, Fan Y, Song W, Gu W, Lu X, Chen Y, Chen X. Hearing outcomes following cochlear implantation with anatomic or default frequency mapping in postlingual deafness adults. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2024 Feb;281(2):719-729. doi: 10.1007/s00405-023-08151-1. Epub 2023 Aug 7.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 37548704 (View on PubMed)

Kurz A, Herrmann D, Hagen R, Rak K. Using Anatomy-Based Fitting to Reduce Frequency-to-Place Mismatch in Experienced Bilateral Cochlear Implant Users: A Promising Concept. J Pers Med. 2023 Jul 8;13(7):1109. doi: 10.3390/jpm13071109.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 37511722 (View on PubMed)

Creff G, Lambert C, Coudert P, Pean V, Laurent S, Godey B. Comparison of Tonotopic and Default Frequency Fitting for Speech Understanding in Noise in New Cochlear Implantees: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind, Cross-Over Study. Ear Hear. 2024 Jan-Feb 01;45(1):35-52. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000001423. Epub 2023 Oct 12.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 37823850 (View on PubMed)

Dillon MT, Canfarotta MW, Buss E, Rooth MA, Richter ME, Overton AB, Roth NE, Dillon SM, Raymond JH, Young A, Pearson AC, Davis AG, Dedmon MM, Brown KD, O'Connell BP. Influence of Electric Frequency-to-Place Mismatches on the Early Speech Recognition Outcomes for Electric-Acoustic Stimulation Users. Am J Audiol. 2023 Mar;32(1):251-260. doi: 10.1044/2022_AJA-21-00254. Epub 2023 Feb 17.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 36800505 (View on PubMed)

Tan CT, Martin B, Svirsky MA. Pitch Matching between Electrical Stimulation of a Cochlear Implant and Acoustic Stimuli Presented to a Contralateral Ear with Residual Hearing. J Am Acad Audiol. 2017 Mar;28(3):187-199. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.15063.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 28277210 (View on PubMed)

Svirsky MA, Fitzgerald MB, Sagi E, Glassman EK. Bilateral cochlear implants with large asymmetries in electrode insertion depth: implications for the study of auditory plasticity. Acta Otolaryngol. 2015 Apr;135(4):354-63. doi: 10.3109/00016489.2014.1002052. Epub 2015 Feb 26.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 25719506 (View on PubMed)

Mertens G, Van de Heyning P, Vanderveken O, Topsakal V, Van Rompaey V. The smaller the frequency-to-place mismatch the better the hearing outcomes in cochlear implant recipients? Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2022 Apr;279(4):1875-1883. doi: 10.1007/s00405-021-06899-y. Epub 2021 Jun 15.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 34131770 (View on PubMed)

Canfarotta MW, Dillon MT, Buss E, Pillsbury HC, Brown KD, O'Connell BP. Frequency-to-Place Mismatch: Characterizing Variability and the Influence on Speech Perception Outcomes in Cochlear Implant Recipients. Ear Hear. 2020 Sep/Oct;41(5):1349-1361. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000864.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 32205726 (View on PubMed)

Goupell MJ, Noble JH, Phatak SA, Kolberg E, Cleary M, Stakhovskaya OA, Jensen KK, Hoa M, Kim HJ, Bernstein JGW. Computed-Tomography Estimates of Interaural Mismatch in Insertion Depth and Scalar Location in Bilateral Cochlear-Implant Users. Otol Neurotol. 2022 Jul 1;43(6):666-675. doi: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000003538.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 35761459 (View on PubMed)

Fitzgerald MB, Prosolovich K, Tan CT, Glassman EK, Svirsky MA. Self-Selection of Frequency Tables with Bilateral Mismatches in an Acoustic Simulation of a Cochlear Implant. J Am Acad Audiol. 2017 May;28(5):385-394. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.15077.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 28534729 (View on PubMed)

Fitzgerald MB, Sagi E, Jackson M, Shapiro WH, Roland JT Jr, Waltzman SB, Svirsky MA. Reimplantation of hybrid cochlear implant users with a full-length electrode after loss of residual hearing. Otol Neurotol. 2008 Feb;29(2):168-73. doi: 10.1097/mao.0b013e31815c4875.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 18165793 (View on PubMed)

Shannon RV. The relative importance of amplitude, temporal, and spectral cues for cochlear implant processor design. Am J Audiol. 2002 Dec;11(2):124-7. doi: 10.1044/1059-0889(2002/013).

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 12691223 (View on PubMed)

Fu QJ, Shannon RV. Effects of electrode configuration and frequency allocation on vowel recognition with the Nucleus-22 cochlear implant. Ear Hear. 1999 Aug;20(4):332-44. doi: 10.1097/00003446-199908000-00006.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 10466569 (View on PubMed)

Dorman MF, Loizou PC, Rainey D. Simulating the effect of cochlear-implant electrode insertion depth on speech understanding. J Acoust Soc Am. 1997 Nov;102(5 Pt 1):2993-6. doi: 10.1121/1.420354.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 9373986 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

US2401 MED-EL ABF

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

Effects of Pulses on Loudness
NCT04010721 COMPLETED NA