ArticleOtology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology2025
Anatomy-Based Fitting in Cochlear Implants: Potential for Optimizing Postoperative Outcomes: A Pilot Study.
Article in Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Exploring Anatomy-Based Fitting for Cochlear Implantation: A Narrative Review.Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-facialeReview
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate whether there is a difference in frequency parameters between anatomy-based fitting (ABF) using a preoperative CT scan and clinically based fitting (CBF). STUDY
designMonocentric retrospective registry study.
settingTertiary academic medical center. PATIENTS: 23 CI recipients between 2004 and 2021.
interventionsCI.
main outcome measuresComparison between frequency maps: CBF versus ABF. The frequency parameters used for ABF were estimated based on preoperative CT scans and implanted electrodes.
resultsAll electrode contact frequencies were significantly different between ABF and CBF maps. When the dataset was manually analyzed, 84% (n = 233) of the predicted electrode location frequencies were outside their allocated frequency band in the clinical fitting map.
conclusionsSetting the CI filter bank frequencies based on preoperative electrode location estimates could be a useful alternative when postoperative CT or DVT imaging is not feasible or unavailable. This can serve as a good starting point when trying to reduce frequency-to-place mismatch between frequency allocations of the fitting filter bank and the tonotopy of the cochlea.
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.