ReviewHNO2017
[Intraoperative monitoring of cochlear nerve function during cerebello-pontine angle surgery].
Review in HNO, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Soft and stretchable organic bioelectronics for continuous intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring during microsurgery.Nature biomedical engineering · 2023Article
- Article
- Review
- Review
- Review
- Review
- Electrophysiological Measurements of Peripheral Vestibular Function-A Review of Electrovestibulography.Frontiers in systems neuroscience · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSurgical procedures in the cerebello-pontine angle (CPA), e. g. for vestibular schwannoma, have an increased risk for damage to the cochlear nerve. Consequently, hearing deterioration up to complete deafness may result with severe impact on quality of life. Methods for intraoperative monitoring of function may minimize such risks.
objectiveReview of current methods for intraoperative monitoring of the cochelar nerve and summary of new developments. MATERIALS AND
methodsAnalysis and summary of literature, discussion of new methods.
resultsEarly auditory evoked potentials using click stimuli remain the standard method for intraoperative monitoring of cochlear nerve function. Amplitude and latency changes indicate a risk of postoperative hearing deterioration; however demonstrate only limited further differentiation of hearing quality. As novel methods, near-field recordings may allow faster feedback and auditory steady state responses potentially enable frequency specific testing.
conclusionsIntraoperative monitoring of the cochlear nerve is an integral component of CPA surgery. It enables detection of potential nerve damage and thus contributes to avoiding postoperative functional deficits. Development and implementation of novel and additional approaches may further improve its clinical value.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.