Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28607224›Full record

ArticleJournal of neural engineering2017

Evaluation of focused multipolar stimulation for cochlear implants: a preclinical safety study.

Robert K Shepherd, Andrew K Wise, Ya Lang Enke, Paul M Carter, James B Fallon

Open access · greenAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neural engineering, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 36% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Robert K ShepherdThe Bionics Institute, East Melbourne 3002, Australia.
Andrew K WiseThe Bionics Institute, East Melbourne 3002, Australia.
Ya Lang EnkeCochlear Limited, Sydney 2109, Australia.
Paul M CarterCochlear Limited, Sydney 2109, Australia.
James B FallonThe Bionics Institute, East Melbourne 3002, Australia.
Cochlear (Australia) · AUBionics Institute · AUUniversity of Melbourne · AU

Funding

Establishing the maximum safe stimulation parameters for platinum cochlear implant electrode arrays.R01DC015031 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE · PI SHEPHERD, ROBERT K · 2016 to 2018
$1.3M
NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC015031
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveCochlear implants (CIs) have a limited number of independent stimulation channels due to the highly conductive nature of the fluid-filled cochlea. Attempts to develop highly focused stimulation to improve speech perception in CI users includes the use of simultaneous stimulation via multiple current sources. Focused multipolar (FMP) stimulation is an example of this approach and has been shown to reduce interaction between stimulating channels. However, compared with conventional biphasic current pulses generated from a single current source, FMP is a complex stimulus that includes extended periods of stimulation before charge recovery is achieved, raising questions on whether chronic stimulation with this strategy is safe. The present study evaluated the long-term safety of intracochlear stimulation using FMP in a preclinical animal model of profound deafness. APPROACH: Six cats were bilaterally implanted with scala tympani electrode arrays two months after deafening, and received continuous unilateral FMP stimulation at levels that evoked a behavioural response for periods of up to 182 d. Electrode impedance, electrically-evoked compound action potentials (ECAPs) and auditory brainstem responses (EABRs) were monitored periodically over the course of the stimulation program from both the stimulated and contralateral control cochleae. On completion of the stimulation program cochleae were examined histologically and the electrode arrays were evaluated for evidence of platinum (Pt) corrosion. MAIN

resultsThere was no significant difference in electrode impedance between control and chronically stimulated electrodes following long-term FMP stimulation. Moreover, there was no significant difference between ECAP and EABR thresholds evoked from control or stimulated cochleae at either the onset of stimulation or at completion of the stimulation program. Chronic FMP stimulation had no effect on spiral ganglion neuron (SGN) survival when compared with unstimulated control cochleae. Long-term implantation typically evoked a mild foreign body reaction proximal to the electrode array; however stimulated cochleae exhibited a small but statistically significant increase in the tissue response. Finally, there was no evidence of Pt corrosion following long-term FMP stimulation; stimulated electrodes exhibited the same surface features as the unstimulated control electrodes. SIGNIFICANCE: Chronic intracochlear FMP stimulation at levels used in the present study did not adversely affect electrically-evoked neural thresholds or SGN survival but evoked a small, benign increase in inflammatory response compared to control ears. Moreover chronic FMP stimulation does not affect the surface of Pt electrodes at suprathreshold stimulus levels. These findings support the safe clinical application of an FMP stimulation strategy.

Indexed as

AnimalsCatsCochlear ImplantationCochlear ImplantsDeafnessElectric StimulationEvoked Potentials, AuditoryEvoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain Stem

Identifiers

PMID28607224
PMCPMC5681383
OpenAlexW2618366713

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.