ArticleAudiology research2025
Electrode Impedance Subcomponent Analysis in Cochlear Implant Patients with Rising or Fluctuating Electrode Impedances.
Article in Audiology research, 2025. 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.
- Comparative spatiotemporal dynamics of access resistance, polarization impedance, and nested bipolar impedance in standard and dexamethasone-eluting electrode arrays.Hearing research · 2026Article
- Electrode impedance in cochlear implantation: determinants, dynamics, and clinical implications.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 · 2026Review
- Intraoperative Impedance Gradient as a Physiological Indicator of Electrode-Neural Interface in Pediatric Cochlear Implantation.Journal of otology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesElectrode impedance is crucial for optimizing cochlear implant (CI) stimulation and hearing outcomes. While typically stable, some patients experience unexplained impedance fluctuations. This study used electrode impedance subcomponent analysis to identify the subcomponents contributing to these impedance fluctuations.
methodsThis study analyzed clinical electrode impedances and transimpedance matrix (TIM) measurements in 10 CI patients with Nucleus devices (CI422, CI522, or CI622 electrode arrays) who exhibited fluctuating or rising electrode impedances. TIM measurements used a cathodic-leading biphasic pulse (110 CLs, 75 µs/phase, 7 µs interphase interval). Electrode impedances were determined at 6, 12, 18, 24, and 75 µs, and subcomponents (access resistance [near-field/far-field] and polarization impedance [Warburg capacitance/Faraday resistance]) were calculated.
resultsBoth access resistance and polarization impedance changes contributed to impedance fluctuations. Large changes in near-field resistance compared to far-field resistance were associated with increased resistance to current flow closer to the surface of the electrode. The decreased double-layer capacitance and slightly increased Faraday resistance further suggested increased resistance to charge transfer at the electrode-electrolyte interface.
conclusionsElectrode impedance subcomponent analysis reveals changes in the electrochemical reaction at the electrode surface that cause fluctuating or rising CI electrode impedances.
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.