Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28859106›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Local inner ear application of dexamethasone in cochlear implant models is safe for auditory neurons and increases the neuroprotective effect of chronic electrical stimulation.

Verena Scheper, Roland Hessler, Mareike Hütten, Maciej Wilk, Claude Jolly, Thomas Lenarz, Gerrit Paasche

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Multicargo Porous Cochlear Electrode Coating for Antifibrosis After Cochlear Implantation.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025
    Article
  5. Study on Recovery Strategy of Hearing Loss & SGN Regeneration Under Physical Regulation.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Immune Response After Cochlear Implantation.Frontiers in neurology · 2020
    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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Verena ScheperHannover Medical School (MHH), Department of Otolaryngology, Hannover, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8618-8793
Roland HesslerMED-EL Innsbruck, Research & Development, Innsbruck, Österreich.
Mareike HüttenHannover Medical School (MHH), Department of Otolaryngology, Hannover, Germany.
Maciej WilkHannover Medical School (MHH), Department of Otolaryngology, Hannover, Germany.
Claude JollyMED-EL Innsbruck, Research & Development, Innsbruck, Österreich.
Thomas LenarzHannover Medical School (MHH), Department of Otolaryngology, Hannover, Germany.
Gerrit PaascheHannover Medical School (MHH), Department of Otolaryngology, Hannover, Germany.
Medizinische Hochschule Hannover · DEMED-EL (Austria) · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dexamethasone (DEX) can reduce fibrous tissue growth as well as loss of residual hearing which may occur after cochlear implantation. Little is known about the effect of local inner ear DEX treatment on the spiral ganglion neurons (SGN), which are the target of the electrical stimulation with a cochlear implant (CI). Three different clinically relevant strategies of DEX-delivery into the inner ear were used. DEX was either eluted from the electrode carriers' silicone, released from a reservoir by passive diffusion, or actively applied using a pump based system. The effect of the locally applied DEX on SGN density, size and function was evaluated. DEX did not affect the SGN density compared to the relevant control groups. Simultaneously applied with chronic electrical stimulation (ES), DEX increased the neuroprotective effect of ES in the basal region and the hearing threshold tended to decrease. The EABR thresholds did not correlate with the relevant SGN density. When correlating the SGN number with fibrosis, no dependency was observed. DEX concentrations as applied in these animal models are safe for inner ear delivery in terms of their effect on SGN density. Additionally, DEX tends to improve the neuroprotective effect of chronic electrical stimulation by increasing the number of surviving neurons. This is an important finding in regard to clinical applications of DEX for local treatment of the inner ear in view of cochlear implantation and other applications.

Indexed as

AnimalsCochleaCochlear ImplantsDexamethasoneEar, InnerElectric StimulationEvoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain StemGuinea PigsHearingHumansNeuronsNeuroprotective AgentsSpiral GanglionDexamethasoneNeuroprotective Agents

Identifiers

PMID28859106
PMCPMC5578571
OpenAlexW2751709744

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.