Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29855691›Full record

ArticleEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2018

P1 cortical auditory evoked potential in children with unilateral or bilateral cochlear implants; implication for the timing of second cochlear implantation.

Sung Wook Jeong, Seung Hyun Chung, Lee-Suk Kim

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 46% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. [Application of P1 response threshold of cortical auditory evoked potential in rehabilitation evaluation of young children with cochlear implant].Lin chuang er bi yan hou tou jing wai ke za zhi = Journal of clinical otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sung Wook JeongDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, College of Medicine, Dong-A University, 3-1 Dongdaeshin-dong, Seo-gu, Busan, 602-715, South Korea.
Seung Hyun ChungDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, College of Medicine, Dong-A University, 3-1 Dongdaeshin-dong, Seo-gu, Busan, 602-715, South Korea.
Lee-Suk KimDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, College of Medicine, Dong-A University, 3-1 Dongdaeshin-dong, Seo-gu, Busan, 602-715, South Korea. klsolkor@chol.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1422-960X
Dong-A University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo examine maturation of the central auditory pathway, using P1 cortical auditory evoked potential (CAEP), in children who had received unilateral or bilateral cochlear implantation (CI). STUDY

designProspective study.

settingTertiary referral hospital.

methodsTwenty children who had received CI due to congenital, or prelingual, deafness participated in the study. Participants had received the 1st implant at a mean age of 3.4 ± 0.7 years; 16 had also received a 2nd CI for the contralateral ear, at a mean age of 11.1 ± 2.1 years. P1 CAEP was recorded while using the 1st implant and, for those who received contralateral CI, within 2 weeks of switching on the 2nd implant. Relations between P1 latency and duration with the 1st implant, and between age at 1st CI and P1 latency, were investigated. Relations between P1 latency with the 1st and 2nd implants, and between the interstage interval and difference between P1 latencies with the 1st and 2nd implants, were also examined.

resultsP1 CAEP with the 1st implant was present in 16 of the 20 children. Mean P1 latency was shorter in the early CI group compared with the late CI group, but this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.154). There was a significant negative correlation between the duration with the 1st implant and P1 latency (r = - 0.783, p < 0.001). Among the 16 children with sequential bilateral CI, P1 CAEP with the 2nd implant was present in 10. There was a significant negative correlation between the duration with the 1st implant before receiving the 2nd implant and P1 latency with the 2nd implant (r = - 0.710, p = 0.021); there was also a significant positive correlation between P1 latency with the 1st and 2nd implants (r = 0.722, p = 0.018). There was not a significant correlation between interstage interval and the difference between the two P1 latencies (r = - 0.430, p = 0.248).

conclusionLonger cochlear implant use is associated with shorter P1 latency. Unilateral hearing with the 1st implant may positively affect P1 latency with the 2nd CI ear. These findings imply that increased auditory experience may influence central auditory pathway maturation and that the degree of central auditory pathway maturation before the 2nd CI, rather than the timing when the surgery is received, may influence 2nd CI outcome in children with sequential bilateral cochlear implants.

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantationCochlear ImplantsAuditory PathwaysChildChild, PreschoolDeafnessEvoked Potentials, AuditoryFemaleHumansInfantMaleProspective StudiesTime FactorsCentral auditory pathwayChildCochlear implantsCortical auditory evoked potential

Identifiers

PMID29855691
OpenAlexW2807279367

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.