Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35239655›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Proteome profile of patients with excellent and poor speech intelligibility after cochlear implantation: Can perilymph proteins predict performance?

Martin Durisin, Caroline Krüger, Andreas Pich, Athanasia Warnecke, Melanie Steffens, Carsten Zeilinger, Thomas Lenarz, Nils Prenzler, Heike Schmitt

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 40% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. A novel technique for safe intraoperative perilymph sampling in humans.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 · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Martin DurisinDepartment of Otolaryngology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Caroline KrügerDepartment of Otolaryngology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Andreas PichCore Facility Proteomics, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Athanasia WarneckeDepartment of Otolaryngology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9652-1035
Melanie SteffensDepartment of Otolaryngology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2266-2278
Carsten ZeilingerBMWZ (Zentrum für Biomolekulare Wirkstoffe), Gottfried-Wilhelm-Leibniz University, Hannover, Germany.
Thomas LenarzDepartment of Otolaryngology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Nils PrenzlerDepartment of Otolaryngology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Heike SchmittDepartment of Otolaryngology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Medizinische Hochschule Hannover · DELeibniz University Hannover · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Modern proteomic analysis and reliable surgical access to gain liquid inner ear biopsies have enabled in depth molecular characterization of the cochlea microenvironment. In order to clarify whether the protein composition of the perilymph can provide new insights into individual hearing performance after cochlear implantation (CI), computational analysis in correlation to clinical performance after CI were performed based on the proteome profile derived from perilymph samples (liquid biopsies). Perilymph samples from cochlear implant recipients have been analyzed by mass spectrometry (MS). The proteins were identified using the shot-gun proteomics method and quantified and analyzed using Max Quant, Perseus and IPA software. A total of 75 perilymph samples from 68 (adults and children) patients were included in the analysis. Speech perception data one year after implantation were available for 45 patients and these were used for subsequent analysis. According to their hearing performance, patients with excellent (n = 22) and poor (n = 14) performance one year after CI were identified and used for further analysis. The protein composition and statistically significant differences in the two groups were detected by relative quantification of the perilymph proteins. With this procedure, a selection of 287 proteins were identified in at least eight samples in both groups. In the perilymph of the patients with excellent and poor performance, five and six significantly elevated proteins were identified respectively. These proteins seem to be involved in different immunological processes in excellent and poor performer. Further analysis on the role of specific proteins as predictors for poor or excellent performance among CI recipients are mandatory. Combinatory analysis of molecular inner ear profiles and clinical performance data using bioinformatics analysis may open up new possibilities for patient stratification. The impact of such prediction algorithms on diagnosis and treatment needs to be established in further studies.

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantationPerilymphProteomeAdolescentAdultAgedChildChild, PreschoolCochlear ImplantsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProteomicsSpeech IntelligibilitySpeech PerceptionProteome

Identifiers

PMID35239655
PMCPMC8893673
OpenAlexW4214916588

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.