ArticleJournal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO2026
Effects of Electrode Position on Vestibular Implant Performance in Rhesus Macaque.
Article in Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeVestibular implants that target the three semicircular canal branches of the vestibular nerve can partially restore the 3-dimensional vestibulo-ocular reflex (3D VOR) in individuals disabled by bilateral vestibular hypofunction. A key goal of implant design is optimizing the number, spacing, and placement of stimulating and return electrodes to maximize response strength and selectivity. While computational models provide initial insights, empirical data are essential to validate performance.
methodsWe unilaterally implanted stimulating electrodes in each semicircular canal and positioned return electrodes both inside the labyrinth and outside the temporal bone in three female rhesus macaques. Using mixed-effects ANOVA, we quantified how electrode location influenced 3D VOR response magnitude and misalignment.
resultsWe found that: (1) the deepest stimulating electrode in each canal generally yielded the strongest and most aligned responses; (2) a 600-750 µm difference in electrode position significantly impacted VOR outcomes; (3) return electrodes placed inside the labyrinth produced significantly larger VOR responses than those placed outside the temporal bone when stimulus current is constrained to levels that elicit no sign of facial nerve excitation; and (4) "near-bipolar" stimulation-using a return electrode in the same ampulla as the stimulating electrode-yielded better alignment.
conclusionAlthough including multiple stimulating electrodes per canal may lower the risk of missing the target, a VI limited to one deep stimulating electrode per canal and one common return electrode can suffice if array design and surgical technique ensure placement near the crista ampullaris. Unused stimulator channels could be repurposed in designs intended to stimulate the utricle, saccule and/or cochlea. Moreover, spatial selectivity is improved by placing return electrodes within the labyrinth or ampullae, rather than outside the temporal bone. VIs that use a single common return electrode shared by all stimulation channels could achieve better performance in the future by incorporating multiple independent return electrode channels to permit near-bipolar stimulation.
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.