ArticleHeliyon2022
The intraoperative relationship between intracochlear electrical field and excitability of the auditory nerve.
Article in Heliyon, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Age-dependent Shifts in Spiral Ganglion Neuron Subtypes Are Associated with Interphase Gap-dependent Modulation of Electrically Evoked Compound Action Potentials in Mice.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2026Article
- Simulated auditory nerve response evoked by lateral-wall and peri-modiolar electrode arrays inserted in scala tympani or scala vestibuli.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A limiting factor of cochlear implant (CI) technology is the electrode-contact overlapping spread of the electrode-generated intracochlear electrical field (EF). While the extent of the spread can be reduced with intracochlear ground electrodes, the stimulation level must be increased to reach similar loudness as with monopolar stimulation utilizing an extracochlear ground. In this study, we investigated the relationship between the monopolar intracochlear EF and the minimum stimulation level required for a measurable neural response assessed with electrically evoked compound action potential (eCAP) thresholds in intraoperative settings. Also, the effect of cochlear diameter on the intracochlear EF was evaluated, as narrower intracochlear EFs were found from larger than smaller cochleae in an earlier study. A total of 171 ears of severely-to-profoundly hearing-impaired patients (ages 0.7-89 years; 42.5 ± 27.8 years, mean ± SD) implanted with a Cochlear Nucleus CI522 or CI622 implant and Slim Straight electrode array or with a Med-El Synchrony implant and Flex 28 electrode array were included in the study. Normal anatomy was established and cochlear diameter was measured for all patients from preoperative imaging. Intraoperative intracochlear EF and eCAP threshold measurements were measured for both Cochlear and Med-El devices with the CIs' back-telemetry options, and EF and eCAP were compared for Cochlear devices. The peak and width of the intracochlear EF correlated with each other (
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.