ArticleScientific reports2025
Power-efficient ramped stimulation in a fully implantable cochlear implant.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
Abstract
Cochlear implants (CIs) are among the most established neuromodulation devices, providing auditory perception through electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve. While conventional stimulation strategies rely on symmetric biphasic rectangular pulses, alternative pulse shapes may offer improvements in neural activation and energy efficiency-particularly for fully implantable CI systems where power consumption is a key limitation. In this study, we investigate the efficacy of anodic-first ramped biphasic pulse shapes compared to conventional anodic-first rectangular pulses, using a custom-designed fully implantable cochlear implant (FICI) system in an in vivo guinea pig model. Electrically evoked auditory brainstem responses (eABRs) were recorded in response to four charge-balanced waveform types: Rectangular, RampUp, RampDown, and RampLong. In this single-subject feasibility study, ramped waveforms elicited significantly larger eABR amplitudes, steeper input-output functions, and shorter latencies compared to rectangular pulses. Additionally, we characterized transmission efficiency across the electrode-tissue interface by analyzing waveform spectra and their attenuation through a frequency-dependent medium model. After correcting for these medium-specific losses, in the anodic-first biphasic configuration, RampUp and RampLong pulses demonstrated up to 19-22% improvement in power efficiency relative to rectangular pulses at subthreshold response levels. These findings highlight the potential of ramped stimulation to reduce energy consumption without compromising-and in some cases enhancing-neural activation. Such improvements are especially valuable for fully implantable devices, supporting longer battery life and more sustainable stimulation strategies in next-generation CIs.
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.