ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2022
Minimally invasive surgical techniques in vestibular function preservation in patients with cochlear implants.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Vestibulo-ocular reflex dynamics with head-impulses discriminates Usher patients type 1 and 2.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cochlear implantation (CI) is an effective and successful method of treating individuals with severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL). Coupled with it's great clinical effectiveness, there is a risk of vestibular damage. With recent advances in surgical approach, modified electrode arrays and other surgical techniques, the potential of hearing preservation (HP) has emerged, in order to preserve the inner ear function. These techniques may also lead to less vestibular damage. However, a systematic study on this at different follow-ups after CI surgery has not been documented before. Aims: To investigate changes of vestibular function systematically in recipients at short and long follow-ups after a minimally invasive CI surgery. Methods: In this retrospective study, 72 patients (72 ears) with minimally invasive CI were recruited. All participants selected had bilateral SNHL and pre-operative residual hearing (RH) and underwent unilateral CI. They were treated to comprehensive care. All patients underwent vestibular function tests 5 days prior to CI. During the post-operative period, follow-up tests were performed at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. The contemporaneous results of caloric, cervical vestibular-evoked myogenic potential (cVEMP), ocular vestibular-evoked myogenic potential (oVEMP), and video head impulse (vHIT) tests were followed together longitudinally. Results: On the implanted side, the percent fail rate of caloric test was significantly higher than that of vHIT at 1, 3, and 9 months post-operatively ( Conclusion: The short- and long-term impacts on the vestibular function from minimally invasive CI surgery was explored. Most of the vestibular functions can be preserved with no damage discrepancy among the otolith and three semicircular canal functions at 12 months post-CI. Interestingly, a similar pattern of changes in vestibular function was found during the early and the later stages of recovery after surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.