ReviewFrontiers in neuroscience2024
Decreasing the physical gap in the neural-electrode interface and related concepts to improve cochlear implant performance.
Review in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Biohybrid cochlear implants: neural interfaces, regenerative pathways, and translational benchmarks.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Review
- Review
- Active Rehabilitation Technologies for Post-Stroke Patients.Biosensors · 2025Review
- Frequency Following Responses to Electric Cochlear Stimulation in an Animal Model.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 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.
Funding
Abstract
Cochlear implants (CI) represent incredible devices that restore hearing perception for those with moderate to profound sensorineural hearing loss. However, the ability of a CI to restore complex auditory function is limited by the number of perceptually independent spectral channels provided. A major contributor to this limitation is the physical gap between the CI electrodes and the target spiral ganglion neurons (SGNs). In order for CI electrodes to stimulate SGNs more precisely, and thus better approximate natural hearing, new methodologies need to be developed to decrease this gap, (i.e., transitioning CIs from a far-field to near-field device). In this review, strategies aimed at improving the neural-electrode interface are discussed in terms of the magnitude of impact they could have and the work needed to implement them. Ongoing research suggests current clinical efforts to limit the CI-related immune response holds great potential for improving device performance. This could eradicate the dense, fibrous capsule surrounding the electrode and enhance preservation of natural cochlear architecture, including SGNs. In the long term, however, optimized future devices will likely need to induce and guide the outgrowth of the peripheral process of SGNs to be in closer proximity to the CI electrode in order to better approximate natural hearing. This research is in its infancy; it remains to be seen which strategies (surface patterning, small molecule release, hydrogel coating, etc.) will be enable this approach. Additionally, these efforts aimed at optimizing CI function will likely translate to other neural prostheses, which face similar issues.
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.