Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31389846›Full record

ArticleEar and hearing

A Comparison of Intracochlear Pressures During Ipsilateral and Contralateral Stimulation With a Bone Conduction Implant.

Jameson K Mattingly, Renee M Banakis Hartl, Herman A Jenkins, Daniel J Tollin, Stephen P Cass, Nathaniel T Greene

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ear and hearing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Effects of Varying Laser Parameters During Laser Stapedotomy on Intracochlear Pressures.Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2023
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
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

6 authors.

Jameson K MattinglyDepartment of Otolaryngology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.
Renee M Banakis HartlDepartment of Otolaryngology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.
Herman A JenkinsDepartment of Otolaryngology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.
Daniel J TollinDepartment of Otolaryngology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.
Stephen P CassDepartment of Otolaryngology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.
Nathaniel T GreeneDepartment of Otolaryngology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.

Funding

Institutional Training in Otolaryngology ResearchT32DC012280 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI Yuri Agrawal, Sue C. Kinnamon · 2013 to 2026
$3.4M
Improving an animal model of human hearing loss: quantifying risks associated with common otolaryngology proceduresR21DC017809 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI GREENE, NATHANIEL TUSSING · 2019 to 2021
$467k
NIDCD NIH HHS R21 DC017809NIDCD NIH HHS T32 DC012280
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo compare contralateral to ipsilateral stimulation with percutaneous and transcutaneous bone conduction implants.

backgroundBone conduction implants (BCIs) effectively treat conductive and mixed hearing losses. In some cases, such as in single-sided deafness, the BCI is implanted contralateral to the remaining healthy ear in an attempt to restore some of the benefits provided by binaural hearing. While the benefit of contralateral stimulation has been shown in at least some patients, it is not clear what cues or mechanisms contribute to this function. Previous studies have investigated the motion of the ossicular chain, skull, and round window in response to bone vibration. Here, we extend those reports by reporting simultaneous measurements of cochlear promontory velocity and intracochlear pressures during bone conduction stimulation with two common BCI attachments, and directly compare ipsilateral to contralateral stimulation.

methodsFresh-frozen whole human heads were prepared bilaterally with mastoidectomies. Intracochlear pressure (PIC) in the scala vestibuli (PSV) and tympani (PST) was measured with fiber optic pressure probes concurrently with cochlear promontory velocity (VProm) via laser Doppler vibrometry during stimulation provided with a closed-field loudspeaker or a BCI. Stimuli were pure tones between 120 and 10,240 Hz, and response magnitudes and phases for PIC and VProm were measured for air and bone conducted sound presentation.

resultsContralateral stimulation produced lower response magnitudes and longer delays than ipsilateral in all measures, particularly for high-frequency stimulation. Contralateral response magnitudes were lower than ipsilateral response magnitudes by up to 10 to 15 dB above ~2 kHz for a skin-penetrating abutment, which increased to 25 to 30 dB and extended to lower frequencies when applied with a transcutaneous (skin drive) attachment.

conclusionsTranscranial attenuation and delay suggest that ipsilateral stimulation will be dominant for frequencies over ~1 kHz, and that complex phase interactions will occur during bilateral or bimodal stimulation. These effects indicate a mechanism by which bilateral users could gain some bilateral advantage.

Indexed as

Bone ConductionScala VestibuliAcoustic StimulationCochleaHearingHumansSound

Identifiers

PMID31389846
PMCPMC8043255

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.