ArticleFrontiers in neurology2025
Timing of cochlear implantation in large vestibular aqueduct syndrome-a retrospective cohort analysis.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Determining ideal electrode insertion depth in paediatric cochlear implantation.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 · 2026Article
- Audiometric and vestibular outcomes following temporal bone fractures: a retrospective analysis of a major trauma center cohort in China.Frontiers in medicine · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Large vestibular aqueduct syndrome (LVAS) typically manifests fluctuating, progressive, or sudden hearing loss. Cochlear implantation (CI) is a critical intervention for LVAS patients when hearing aids (HA) no longer confer sufficient benefit. However, determining the optimal timing for CI remains challenging due to the heterogeneous and unpredictable nature of hearing loss progression, particularly when audiological criteria for CI are met, and HA can still provide benefits. This study aimed to address these complexities by analyzing real-world data on the timing of CI and clinical decision-making processes in pediatric LVAS patients. Methods: This retrospective cohort study reviewed the medical records of 74 pediatric patients (<18 years) with LVAS who underwent CI at a tertiary care hospital in China between 2010 and 2023. Clinical data, including newborn hearing screening (NBHS) results, methods of hearing loss identification, hearing levels at the initial audiological assessment (IAA), and patterns of hearing loss progression, were analyzed. Additionally, key milestones were evaluated, including age at hearing loss identification, IAA, and CI, and the durations between these events. Results: The median age at CI was 4.9 years (IQR: 3.0-6.8), with a median duration from IAA to CI of 2.9 years (IQR: 1.6-5.2). Patients identified through NBHS underwent CI earlier than those identified through poor response to sound or language learning difficulties. Moreover, patients with poor performance at IAA had an earlier age at CI and shorter duration from IAA to CI. CI timing was comparable among different hearing loss progression patterns. Finally, among patients meeting CI criteria but still benefiting from HA, while those who directly underwent CI had an earlier age at implantation, their interval from IAA to CI was similar to those who initially underwent HA fitting. Conclusion: The majority of LVAS patients experience progressive hearing loss and undergo CI during early childhood. Failure of NBHS and poor auditory performance at IAA are indicative of rapid hearing deterioration. Once audiological criteria for CI are met, prolonged observation appears unnecessary. Nevertheless, further prospective longitudinal studies are warranted to refine the timing and decision-making process.
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.