Observational studyThe journal of international advanced otology2025
Quantifying Residual Hearing Loss from Electrode Insertion Trauma in Cochlear Implant Surgery: A Prospective Double-Blind Study.
Observational study in The journal of international advanced otology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundThe aim is to quantify the electrode insertion trauma-induced hearing loss (EITHL), its risk factors, and its impact on speech outcomes in prelingually deafened children undergoing cochlear implantation.
methodsThis was a prospective, observational study conducted at a single center between 2021 and 2024. Forty children aged 1-5 years with severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss underwent cochlear implantation using either the cochleostomy or round-window (RW) techniques. Auditory steady-state response (ASSR) thresholds were utilized to assess hearing preservation levels. Speech outcomes were evaluated by measuring word recognition scores (WRS) at 6, 12, and 24 months. The correlation between electrode insertion depth, hearing preservation, and speech outcomes was analyzed.
resultsAll participants achieved Grade 1 hearing preservation (>75%). The mean hearing preservation rates at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months were 93.2%, 92.3%, 92.9%, and 92.1%, respectively. Although the RWT demonstrated better hearing preservation than the CS technique, the difference was not statistically significant. A significant increase in low-frequency hearing thresholds was observed over time, with 12-month values of 84.9 ± 3.5 dB (250 Hz), 90.2 ± 3.7 dB (500 Hz), and 92.4 ± 4.0 dB (1000 Hz). A negative correlation was found between the depth of electrode insertion and hearing preservation (r=-0.45, P=.03). Word recognition scores improved over time, with bilateral implant recipients showing significantly higher scores (P < .00).
conclusionCochlear implantation via both CS and RW approaches preserves residual hearing in prelingually deafened children, with RW insertion demonstrating superior preservation. Deeper electrode insertion is associated with poorer hearing preservation, while better hearing preservation correlates with improved speech outcomes.
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.