Severe to Profound Hearing Loss Clinical Trial
— ROBOT-IC-BRUITOfficial title:
Impact of Robotic Cochlear Implantation on Hearing Performance in Noise
The purpose of this study is to compare two methods of cochlear implantation : conventional manual insertion versus robot-assisted in order to verify whether robotic insertion provides better performance in the noisy environment. To do this, we will compare the two methods of insertion of the electrode holder, on 140 patients candidates for cochlear implantation randomized in two groups (70 conventional surgery versus 70 robot-assisted surgery). All patients will be recruited during 17 months, in our Ear, nose and throat (ENT) Department of the Pitié-Salpêtrière hospital group, the first center for adult patients established in France (on average 180 patients/year). Patient will be followed for 9 months with clinical evaluation, imaging, audiometric, listening effort and quality of life assessments. These evaluations will be carried out preoperatively and postoperatively at 3 months and 6 months post-activation of the cochlear implant.
Status | Not yet recruiting |
Enrollment | 140 |
Est. completion date | April 2025 |
Est. primary completion date | April 2025 |
Accepts healthy volunteers | No |
Gender | All |
Age group | 18 Years and older |
Eligibility | Inclusion Criteria: - Adult patient = 18 years old - Patient with an indication for uni- or bilateral, simultaneous or sequential cochlear implantation according to HAS criteria: severe to profound moderate hearing loss with intelligibility = 50% for Fournier's disyllabic words, in free field, at 60 dB with adapted hearing aids - Patient able to understand the information note and give written consent - Affiliation to a French social security system Exclusion Criteria: - Patient who does not speak French - Etiologies of deafness known to be of bad prognosis (auditory neuropathy, congenital profound deafness, immediate post-meningitis profound deafness, vestibular schwannoma on the side of the ear to be implanted) - Impossibility of testing the effect of the cochlear implant alone on hearing results (cochlear implantation in the context of unilateral deafness or fluctuating deafness) - Cochlear implantation requiring the use of a perimodiolar electrode holder. - Pregnant and breastfeeding women - Patients wearing electronic devices, in direct connection with the brain or nervous system - Patient included in another interventional study (Jardé 1) - Patient under legal protection (guardianship or curatorship) or deprived of liberty |
Country | Name | City | State |
---|---|---|---|
France | Groupe Hospitalier Pitié-Salpêtrière | Paris |
Lead Sponsor | Collaborator |
---|---|
Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris |
France,
Type | Measure | Description | Time frame | Safety issue |
---|---|---|---|---|
Primary | Auditory performance in noise with the cochlear implant | Evolution of the intelligibility score (Variation of the percentage of words understood) for monosyllabic Lafon words presented at 60 dB SPL with a signal-to-noise ratio of 10 dB (SNR10) between the preoperative score and the score at 6 months post-implantation | At 6 months post-implantation | |
Secondary | Hearing performance in noise after robotic cochlear implantation compared to conventional manual cochlear implantation for phonemes | Evolution of the intelligibility score (Variation of the percentage of words and phonemes understood) for monosyllabic Lafon words presented at 60 dB SPL with a signal-to-noise ratio of 10 dB (SNR10) between the preoperative score and the score at 3 months and at 6 months post-implantation. | At 3 and 6 months post-implantation | |
Secondary | Hearing performance in noise under ecological conditions after robotic cochlear implantation compared to conventional manual cochlear implantation | Evolution of the intelligibility score (Variation of the percentage of words understood) for Fr-Bio words presented at 60 dB SPL with a signal-to-noise ratio of 10 dB (SNR10) between the preoperative score and the score at 3 months and at 6 months post-implantation. The noise will be an ecological noise (restaurant or street noise) using the Immersion® system. | At 3 and 6 months post-implantation | |
Secondary | Hearing performance in silence after robotic cochlear implantation compared to conventional manual cochlear implantation for words | Evolution of the intelligibility score (Variation of the percentage of words understood) for monosyllabic Lafon words presented at 60 dB SPL in quiet between the preoperative score and the score at 3 months and at 6 months post-implantation. | At 3 and 6 months post-implantation | |
Secondary | Hearing performance in silence after robotic cochlear implantation compared to conventional manual cochlear implantation for phonemes | Evolution of the intelligibility score (Variation of the percentage of phonemes understood) for monosyllabic Lafon words presented at 60 dB SPL in quiet between the preoperative score and the score at 3 months and at 6 months post-implantation. | At 3 and 6 months post-implantation | |
Secondary | The subjective benefit on tinnitus after robotic cochlear implantation compared to conventional manual cochlear implantation | Evolution of the Patient's Related Outcomes Measures using questionnaire concerning the tinnitus with the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI) | At 3 and 6 months post-implantation | |
Secondary | The subjective benefit on quality of life after robotic cochlear implantation compared to conventional manual cochlear implantation | Evolution of the Patient's Related Outcomes Measures using the questionnaire concerning the quality of life with the Cochlear Implant Quality of Life (CIQOL) | At 3 and 6 months post-implantation | |
Secondary | The position of the electrode array in the cochlea during manual and robotic insertions | the position of each electrode will be analyzed blindly on the post-operative CT-scan. | At day one post -implantation | |
Secondary | The impact of a translocation on auditory performance in silence and in noise | Auditory scores measured at 3 and 6 months after implantation will be correlated to the presence of a translocation of the electrode array assessed on the post-operative CT scan. | At 3 and 6 months post-implantation | |
Secondary | The effort of listening in silence and in noise after manual and robotic insertions assessed with the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) | The effort of listening will be analyzed with SSQ scale | At 3 and 6 months post-implantation | |
Secondary | The effort of listening in silence and in noise after manual and robotic insertions assessed with a visual analog scale | The effort of listening will be analyzed after each audiologic test with a visual analog scale, using which the patient will rate from 0 to 10 the effort made to understand the words presented (Bräcker et al., 2019) | At 3 and 6 months post-implantation | |
Secondary | The preservation of residual hearing after cochlear implantation in cases with residual hearing before surgery | Evolution of auditory thresholds measured with tonal audiometry between preoperative and postoperative measurements on the operated ear. | At 30 days, 3 months and 6 months post-implantation | |
Secondary | The presence of postoperative vertigo in case of robotic cochlear implantation compared to manual implantation | Evaluation of vertigo with the Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI) questionnaire | At 7 days, 3 months and 6 months post-implantation |
Status | Clinical Trial | Phase | |
---|---|---|---|
Completed |
NCT01616576 -
Evaluation of a HiRes™ Optima Sound Processing Strategy for the HiResolution™ Bionic Ear
|
N/A |