OBJECTIVE: Sound localization plays a crucial role in our daily lives, enabling us to recognize voices, respond to alarming situations, avoid dangers, and navigate towards specific signals. However, this ability is compromised in patients with Single-Sided Deafness (SSD) and Asymmetric Hearing Loss (AHL), negatively impacting their daily functioning. The main objective of the study was to quantify the degree of sound source localization in patients with single-sided deafness or asymmetric hearing loss using a Cochlear Implant (CI) and to compare between the two subgroups.
METHODS: This was a prospective, longitudinal, observational, single-center study involving adult patients diagnosed with profound unilateral or asymmetric sensorineural hearing loss who underwent cochlear implantation. Sound localization was assessed in a chamber equipped with seven speakers evenly distributed from -90º to 90º. Stimuli were presented at 1000 Hz and intensities of 65 dB, 70 dB, and 75 dB. Each stimulus was presented only once per speaker, totaling 21 presentations. The number of correct responses at different intensities was recorded, and angular error in degrees was calculated to determine the mean angular distance between the patient-indicated speaker and the speaker presenting the stimulus. Both assessments were conducted preoperatively without a cochlear implant and two years post-implantation.
RESULTS: The total sample comprised 20 patients, with 9 assigned to the SSD group and 11 to the AHL group. The Preoperative Pure Tone Average (PTA) in free field was 31.7 dB in the SSD group and 41.8 dB in the AHL group. There was a statistically significant improvement in sound localization ability and angular error with the use of the cochlear implant at all intensities in both SSD and AHL subgroups.
CONCLUSIONS: Cochlear implantation in patients with SSD and AHL enhances sound localization, reducing mean angular error and increasing the number of correct sound localization responses.

BACKGROUND: The conventional evaluation of neural telemetry and impedance requires the use of the computer coupled to an interface, with software that provides visualization of the stimulus and response. Recently, a remote control (CR220®) was launched in the market, that allows the performance of intraoperative tests with minimal instrumentation.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the agreement of the impedance values and neural telemetry thresholds, and the time of performance in the conventional procedure and by the remote control.
METHODS: Multicentric prospective cross-sectional study. Intraoperative evaluations of cochlear implants compatible with the use of CR220® were included. The tests were carried out in the 22 electrodes to compare the time of performance in the two situations. The agreement of the neural telemetry threshold values obtained from five electrodes was analyzed, and the agreement of impedance was evaluated by the number of electrodes with altered values in each procedure.
RESULTS: There were no significant difference between the impedance values. There was a moderate to strong correlation between the electrically-evoked compound action potential thresholds. The mean time to perform the procedures using the CR220 was significantly lower than that with the conventional procedure.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of the CR220 provided successful records for impedance telemetry and automatic neural response telemetry.

BACKGROUND: Cochlear implants are undeniably an effective method for the recovery of hearing function in patients with hearing loss.
OBJECTIVE: To describe the preoperative vestibular assessment protocol in subjects who will be submitted to cochlear implants.
METHODS: Our institutional protocol provides the vestibular diagnosis through six simple tests: Romberg and Fukuda tests, assessment for spontaneous nystagmus, Head Impulse Test, evaluation for Head Shaking Nystagmus and caloric test.
RESULTS: 21 patients were evaluated with a mean age of 42.75±14.38 years. Only 28% of the sample had all normal test results. The presence of asymmetric vestibular information was documented through the caloric test in 32% of the sample and spontaneous nystagmus was an important clue for the diagnosis. Bilateral vestibular areflexia was present in four subjects, unilateral arreflexia in three and bilateral hyporeflexia in two. The Head Impulse Test was a significant indicator for the diagnosis of areflexia in the tested ear (p=0.0001). The sensitized Romberg test using a foam pad was able to diagnose severe vestibular function impairment (p=0.003).
CONCLUSIONS: The six clinical tests were able to identify the presence or absence of vestibular function and function asymmetry between the ears of the same individual.

OBJECTIVE: The cochlear implant is a surgical procedure that has increased substantially, because the paediatric population is diagnosed and implanted early and because there are increased potential indications. This device has the inherent risk of failure in performance, as dies any active medical device, which is the most common cause of implant removal. Our goal was to understand what the causes that produced removal in our series were, and confirm if these conformed to reality as reviewed in the literature.
METHODS: This was a retrospective, descriptive, observational study of 859 cochlear implant surgeries carried out between October 1991 and May 2011. The causes of implant removal were classified according to the European Consensus Statement on Cochlear Implant Failures and Explantations.
RESULTS: The reimplantation rate was 6.16% (n=51). The most common reason for removal was technical device failure (45.5%), followed by infection/rejection (23.6%) and upgrade (12.7%). Less common causes: there were 3 cases (5.6%) of electrode misplacement, 2 cases (3.6%) of labyrinthine ossification, 2 (3.6%) as a result of head trauma, 2 (3.6%) from need for nuclear magnetic resonance imaging and 1 case (1.8%) from psychiatric illness.
CONCLUSIONS: Cochlear reimplantation is a safe procedure, with a low complication rate. In our centre, it reaches an overall rate of 6.16%. Technical device failure remains the most common cause of this procedure, although there is a significant percentage of reimplantation for device update.