Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36846130›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neurology2023

Toward neural health measurements for cochlear implantation: The relationship among electrode positioning, the electrically evoked action potential, impedances and behavioral stimulation levels.

Lars Lambriks, Marc van Hoof, Joke Debruyne, Miranda Janssen, Janny Hof, Katja Hellingman, Elke Devocht, Erwin George

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. A systematic review of electrode array scalar dislocation after cochlear implant surgery.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
    Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

8 authors.

Lars LambriksDepartment of ENT/Audiology, School for Mental Health and NeuroScience, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Marc van HoofDepartment of ENT/Audiology, School for Mental Health and NeuroScience, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Joke DebruyneDepartment of ENT/Audiology, School for Mental Health and NeuroScience, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Miranda JanssenDepartment of ENT/Audiology, School for Mental Health and NeuroScience, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Janny HofDepartment of ENT/Audiology, School for Mental Health and NeuroScience, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Katja HellingmanDepartment of ENT/Audiology, School for Mental Health and NeuroScience, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Elke DevochtDepartment of ENT/Audiology, School for Mental Health and NeuroScience, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Erwin GeorgeDepartment of ENT/Audiology, School for Mental Health and NeuroScience, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Estimating differences in neural health across different sites within the individual cochlea potentially enables clinical applications for subjects with a cochlear implant. The electrically evoked compound action potential (ECAP) is a measure of neural excitability that possibly provides an indication of a neural condition. There are many factors, however, that affect this measure and increase the uncertainty of its interpretation. To better characterize the ECAP response, its relationship with electrode positioning, impedances, and behavioral stimulation levels was explored. Methods: A total of 14 adult subjects implanted with an Advanced Bionics cochlear electrode array were prospectively followed up from surgery to 6 months postoperative. Insertion depth, distance to the modiolus, and distance to the medial wall were assessed for each electrode by postoperative CT analysis. ECAPs were measured intraoperatively and at three visits postoperatively on all 16 electrodes using the NRI feature of clinical programming software and characterized using multiple parameters. Impedances and behavioral stimulation levels were measured at every fitting session. Results: Patterns in ECAPs and impedances were consistent over time, but high variability existed among subjects and between different positions in the cochlea. Electrodes located closer to the apex of the cochlea and closer to the modiolus generally showed higher neural excitation and higher impedances. Maximum loudness comfort levels were correlated strongly with the level of current needed to elicit a response of 100 μV ECAP. Conclusion: Multiple factors contribute to the ECAP response in subjects with a cochlear implant. Further research might address whether the ECAP parameters used in this study will benefit clinical electrode fitting or the assessment of auditory neuron integrity.

Indexed as

cochlear implantECAPelectrode positioningimpedancesneural healthstimulation levels

Identifiers

PMID36846130
PMCPMC9948626

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.