Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33789270›Full record

Trial reportAudiology & neuro-otology2021

Cochlear Implantation and Other Treatments in Single-Sided Deafness and Asymmetric Hearing Loss: Results of a National Multicenter Study Including a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Mathieu Marx, Isabelle Mosnier, Frederic Venail, Michel Mondain, Alain Uziel, David Bakhos, Emmanuel Lescanne, Yann N'Guyen, Daniele Bernardeschi, Olivier Sterkers and 7 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMulticenter StudyObservational StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Audiology & neuro-otology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed
6.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 75 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Cost-utility of cochlear implantation in single-sided deafness and asymmetric hearing loss: results of a randomized controlled trial.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2025
    Trial
  2. A Prospective Multicenter Post-Market Study Evaluating the Safety and Effectiveness of Cochlear Implantation in Adults With Single-Sided Deafness.Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Evaluation of medium-term cochlear implant use in patients with asymmetric hearing loss.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. The international expert consensus on management of external auditory canal carcinoma.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Tinnitus reduction after active bone-conduction implantation in patients with single-sided deafness: a prospective multicenter study.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.

Mathieu MarxService d'Otologie, Otoneurologie et ORL pédiatrique, Hôpital Pierre-Paul Riquet, CHU Purpan, Toulouse, France.
Isabelle MosnierAP-HP6, GHU Pitié-Salpêtrière, Service ORL, Unité Fonctionnelle Implants Auditifs et explorations fonctionnelles, Paris, France.
Frederic VenailService d'ORL, Hôpital Gui de Chauliac, CHU, Montpellier, France.
Michel MondainService d'ORL, Hôpital Gui de Chauliac, CHU, Montpellier, France.
Alain UzielService d'ORL, Hôpital Gui de Chauliac, CHU, Montpellier, France.
David BakhosService d'ORL, Hôpital Bretonneau, CHU Tours, Tours, France.
Emmanuel LescanneService d'ORL, Hôpital Bretonneau, CHU Tours, Tours, France.
Yann N'GuyenAP-HP6, GHU Pitié-Salpêtrière, Service ORL, Unité Fonctionnelle Implants Auditifs et explorations fonctionnelles, Paris, France.
Daniele BernardeschiAP-HP6, GHU Pitié-Salpêtrière, Service ORL, Unité Fonctionnelle Implants Auditifs et explorations fonctionnelles, Paris, France.
Olivier SterkersAP-HP6, GHU Pitié-Salpêtrière, Service ORL, Unité Fonctionnelle Implants Auditifs et explorations fonctionnelles, Paris, France.
Olivier DeguineService d'Otologie, Otoneurologie et ORL pédiatrique, Hôpital Pierre-Paul Riquet, CHU Purpan, Toulouse, France.
Benoît LepageUnité de Soutien Méthodologique à la Recherche, Faculté de Médecine, Université de Toulouse, Toulouse, France.
Benoit GodeyService d'ORL, Hôpital Pontchaillou, CHU, Rennes, France.
Sébastien SchmerberService d'ORL, CHU, Grenoble, France.
Nicolas-Xavier BonneUniversité Lille, Inserm, CHU Lille, Service d'ORL, U1192 - PRISM, Lille, France.
Christophe VincentService d'ORL, Hôpital Salengro, CHU, Lille, France.
Bernard FraysseService d'Otologie, Otoneurologie et ORL pédiatrique, Hôpital Pierre-Paul Riquet, CHU Purpan, Toulouse, France.
Sorbonne Université · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Montpellier · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Tours · FRUniversité Toulouse III - Paul Sabatier · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Grenoble · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Lille · FRHôpital Pontchaillou · FRHôpital Purpan · FRInserm · FRUniversité Fédérale de Toulouse Midi-Pyrénées · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionCochlear implantation is a recent approach proposed to treat single-sided deafness (SSD) and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL). Several cohort studies showed its effectiveness on tinnitus and variable results on binaural hearing. The main objective of this study is to assess the outcomes of cochlear implantation and other treatment options in SSD/AHL on quality of life.

methodsThis prospective multicenter study was conducted in 7 tertiary university hospitals and included an observational cohort study of SSD/AHL adult patients treated using contralateral routing of the signal (CROS) hearing aids or bone-anchored hearing systems (BAHSs) or who declined all treatments, and a randomized controlled trial in subjects treated by cochlear implantation, after failure of CROS and BAHS trials. In total, 155 subjects with SSD or AHL, with or without associated tinnitus, were enrolled. After 2 consecutive trials with CROS hearing aids and BAHSs on headband, all subjects chose any of the 4 treatment options (abstention, CROS, BAHS, or cochlear implant [CI]). The subjects who opted for a CI were randomized between 2 arms (CI vs. initial observation). Six months after the treatment choice, quality of life was assessed using both generic (EuroQoL-5D, EQ-5D) and auditory-specific quality-of-life indices (Nijmegen Cochlear implant Questionnaire [NCIQ] and Visual Analogue Scale [VAS] for tinnitus severity). Performances for speech-in-noise recognition and localization were measured as secondary outcomes.

resultsCROS was chosen by 75 subjects, while 51 opted for cochlear implantation, 18 for BAHSs, and 11 for abstention. Six months after treatment, both EQ-5D VAS and auditory-specific quality-of-life indices were significantly better in the "CI" arm versus "observation" arm. The mean effect of the CI was particularly significant in subjects with associated severe tinnitus (mean improvement of 20.7 points ± 19.7 on EQ-5D VAS, 20.4 ± 12.4 on NCIQ, and 51.4 ± 35.4 on tinnitus). No significant effect of the CI was found on binaural hearing results. Before/after comparisons showed that the CROS and BAHS also improved significantly NCIQ scores (for CROS: +7.7, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] = [4.5; 10.8]; for the BAHS: +14.3, 95% CI = [7.9; 20.7]).

conclusionCochlear implantation leads to significant improvements in quality of life in SSD and AHL patients, particularly in subjects with associated severe tinnitus, who are thereby the best candidates to an extension of CI indications.

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantationCochlear ImplantsDeafnessHearing LossHearing Loss, UnilateralSpeech PerceptionAdultHumansProspective StudiesQuality of LifeTreatment OutcomeAsymmetric hearing lossBone-anchored hearing systemCochlear implantsContralateral routing of the signal hearing AidsQuality of life

Identifiers

PMID33789270
PMCPMC8686720
OpenAlexW3152152401

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.