ArticleOtology & neurotology open2021
Cochlear Implantation and Perioperative Management in Autoimmune Inner Ear Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Article in Otology & neurotology open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cochlear Implantation in Autoimmune Inner-Ear Disease: Outcome and Patient-Reported Benefit.The Laryngoscope · 2026Article
- Incidence and Risk Factors of Cochlear Implant Complications: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Audiology research · 2026Review
- Hearing preservation outcomes with motorized cochlear implant electrode insertion: matched-cohort observations.Frontiers in surgery · 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To assess outcomes in autoimmune inner ear disease (AIED) after cochlear implantation (CI) through systematic review and meta-analysis. Databases Reviewed: PubMed, MedLine, Embase, and CINAHL. Methods: Databases were queried for inclusion of AIED patients who underwent CI with outcomes recorded ≥3 months postoperatively. We examined demographics, pure-tone average (PTA), speech perception, preoperative imaging, intraoperative management, and postoperative complications. Results: Twenty-six articles encompassing 124 patients met inclusion criteria. Mean implantation age was 26.2 years (range 4-65 years) with average length of follow-up at 28.2 months (range 3-120 months). Meta-analysis demonstrated significant improvement in speech perception following CI. There was a statistically significant improvement in speech recognition score (SRS) (standard mean difference [SMD] = 6.5, 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.8-8.0, Conclusion: Findings of this systematic review of AIED cochlear implant literature demonstrate a lack of consistent reporting standards for PTA and speech perception as well as a lack of long-term follow-up. Despite these findings, meta-analysis suggests that CI is a viable treatment for improving speech perception in AIED patients.
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.