Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28900873›Full record

ArticleMedical & biological engineering & computing2018

Numerical analysis of intracochlear mechanical auditory stimulation using piezoelectric bending actuators.

Daniel Schurzig, Sebastian Schwarzendahl, Jörg Wallaschek, Wouter J van Drunen, Thomas S Rau, Thomas Lenarz, Omid Majdani

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Medical & biological engineering & computing, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Daniel SchurzigCluster of Excellence Hearing4all, Department of Otolaryngology, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany. schurzig.daniel@mh-hannover.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2197-1685
Sebastian SchwarzendahlInstitute of Dynamics and Vibration Research, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Hannover, Germany.
Jörg WallaschekInstitute of Dynamics and Vibration Research, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Hannover, Germany.
Wouter J van DrunenCluster of Excellence Hearing4all, Department of Otolaryngology, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany.
Thomas S RauCluster of Excellence Hearing4all, Department of Otolaryngology, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany.
Thomas LenarzCluster of Excellence Hearing4all, Department of Otolaryngology, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany.
Omid MajdaniCluster of Excellence Hearing4all, Department of Otolaryngology, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cochlear implantation can restore a certain degree of auditory impression of patients suffering from profound hearing loss or deafness. Furthermore, studies have shown that in case of residual hearing, patients benefit from the use of a hearing aid in addition to the cochlear implant. The presented studies aim at the improvement of this electromechanical stimulation (EMS) approach by substituting the external hearing aid by an internal stimulus provided by miniaturized piezoelectric actuators. Finite element analyses are performed in order to derive fundamental guidelines for the actuator layout aiming at maximal mechanical stimuli. Further analyses aim at investigating how the actuator position inside the cochlea influences the basilar membrane oscillation profile. While actuator layout guidelines leading to maximized acoustic stimuli could be derived, some of these guidelines are of complementary nature suggesting that further studies under realistic boundary conditions must be performed. Actuator positioning inside the cochlea is shown to have a significant influence on the resulting auditory impression of the patient. Based on the results, the main differences of external and internal stimulation of the cochlea mechanism are identified. It is shown that if the cochlea tonotopy is considered, the frequency selectivity resulting from the mechanical cochlea stimulus may be improved.

Indexed as

Acoustic StimulationCochlear ImplantsNumerical Analysis, Computer-AssistedBasilar MembraneElectric StimulationHumansModels, TheoreticalPressureRound Window, EarVibrationCochlear implantCochlear mechanicsEASEMSPiezo actuatorVibration analysis

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.