Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38170210›Full record

ArticleEuropean 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 Surgery2024

Two different methods to digitally visualize continuous electrocochleography potentials during cochlear implantation: a first description of feasibility.

Theda Eichler, Antonia Lakomek, Laura Waschkies, Moritz Meyer, Nadia Sadok, Stephan Lang, Diana Arweiler-Harbeck

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in 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, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Theda EichlerDepartment of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany. theda.eichler@uk-essen.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0004-5730-4774
Antonia LakomekDepartment of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Laura WaschkiesDepartment of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Moritz MeyerDepartment of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Nadia SadokDepartment of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Stephan LangDepartment of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Diana Arweiler-HarbeckDepartment of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Essen University Hospital · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe study explores the potential of real-time electrocochleographic potentials (ECochG) visualization during electrode insertion using digital microscopes such as RoboticScope (BHS®). Collaborative software development of the MAESTRO Software (MED-EL®) offers continuous ECochG monitoring during implantation and postoperative hearing evaluation, addressing previous time constraints. The study aims to assess software applicability and the impact of real-time visualization on long-term residual hearing preservation.

methodsEight patients with residual hearing underwent cochlear implantation with Flex26 or Flex28 electrode according to the Otoplan evaluation. ECochG responses were measured and visualized during electrode insertion, with insertion times recorded. Two randomized display methods (graph and arrows) tracked ECochG potentials. Postoperative behavioral thresholds determined hearing preservation. Successful real-time intraoperative ECochG visualization was achieved in all cases, enabling surgeon adaptation. Mean electrode insertion time was 114 s, with postoperative thresholds comparable to preoperative values. Visualization did not affect surgeon workload. ECochG amplitudes differed between patients with and without residual hearing.

conclusionThe study demonstrates effective implementation of advanced ECochG software combined with real-time visualization, enabling residual hearing preservation during CI. Visualization had no apparent effect on surgeon performance or workload. Future investigation involving a larger population will assess the long-term impact of ECochG on hearing threshold and structure preservation.

Indexed as

Audiometry, Evoked ResponseCochlear ImplantationFeasibility StudiesSoftwareAdultAgedCochlear ImplantsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedCochlear implantationDigital microscope imagingHearing preservationIntraoperative electrocochleography

Identifiers

PMID38170210
PMCPMC11065901
OpenAlexW4390547755

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.