ReviewAudiology research2022
Intra-Operative Cochlear Nerve Function Monitoring in Hearing Preservation Surgery: A Systematic Review of the Literature.
Review in Audiology research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Intraoperative auditory monitoring in vestibular schwannoma surgery: Diagnostic accuracy and interventional effectiveness - a systematic review.Neurosurgical review · 2026Pooled it
- Comparative Analysis on Vestibular Schwannoma Surgery with and without Intraoperative Fluorescein Sodium Enhancement.Brain sciences · 2024Article
- Novel standardized indexes of brainstem auditory evoked potentials for predicting hearing preservation in vestibular schwannomas.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Prognostic Factors for Hearing Preservation Surgery in Small Vestibular Schwannoma.Audiology research · 2023Review
- Hearing Rehabilitation in Vestibular Schwannoma.Audiology research · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With the recent scientific and technical developments, hearing preservation surgery is becoming a growing objective in inner ear pathologies, especially for vestibular schwannomas. In this review, we aim to describe the pros and cons of the following cochlear nerve monitoring techniques: ABRs (auditory brainstem responses), DENM (direct eighth cranial nerve monitoring), EcochG (electrocochleography), CNAP (cochlear compound nerve action potentials), DPOAE (distortion product otoacoustic emissions), PAMRs (postauricular muscle responses). The Cochrane library, Scopus, DynaMed, and PubMed databases were screened to obtain any relevant papers from October 2009 to the present day. Due to the heterogeneity of the existing studies in the literature, there is no way to tell whether a technique is better than another. All authors reported satisfactory outcomes with the cochlear nerve monitoring techniques tested, either alone or in combination.
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.