Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42084107›Full record

ArticleThe Laryngoscope2026

Multi-Frequency Electrocochleography Results in Fewer Drop Alarms During Cochlear Implant Insertion.

Mana Espahbodi, Ali Syed, Alex Tu, Michael D Seidman, Christopher J Danner, Kyle P Allen, Loren J Bartels, Syed F Ahsan, Courtney C J Voelker, Nicholas L Deep and 18 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The Laryngoscope, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

28 authors.

Mana EspahbodiDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.
Ali SyedDepartment of Otolaryngology & Communication Sciences, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.
Alex TuDepartment of Otolaryngology & Communication Sciences, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.
Michael D SeidmanAdventHealth; University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4494-7031
Christopher J DannerTampa Bay General Hospital, Tampa Bay, Florida, USA.
Kyle P AllenTampa Bay General Hospital, Tampa Bay, Florida, USA.
Loren J BartelsTampa Bay General Hospital, Tampa Bay, Florida, USA.
Syed F AhsanHead & Neck Surgery Department, Southern California Kaiser Permanente Medical Group, Anaheim, California, USA.
Courtney C J VoelkerOtology/Neurotology-Lateral Skull Base Surgery, Pacific Neuroscience Institute, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Nicholas L DeepMayo Clinic Comprehensive Cancer Center Otolaryngology (ENT)/Head and Neck Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Arizona, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2445-7454
Jacob B HunterDepartment of Otolaryngology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3479-1309
Rebecca C ChifferDepartment of Otolaryngology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Elias M MichaelidesDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Mohamed ElrakhawyDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Matthew W MillerOtolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Sanford Health, Fargo, North Dakota, USA.
Harrison W LinDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of California, Irvine, California, USA.
Hamid R DjalilianDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of California, Irvine, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2270-5207
Esther X VivasDepartment of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Simon I AngeliDepartment of Otolaryngology, UHealth Ear Institute, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida, USA.
Michael HoaDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA.
H Jeffrey KimDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA.
Mark H WidickENT of South Florida, Boca Raton, Florida, USA.
Katrina R StidhamDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Westchester Medical Center, Valhalla, New York, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0857-5725
Neil S PatelDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.
Richard K GurgelDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9601-2628
Karl W DoerferDepartment of Otolaryngology & Communication Sciences, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9409-4946
Kanthaiah KokaResearch and Technology, Advanced Bionics LLC, Valencia, California, USA.
Michael S HarrisDepartment of Otolaryngology & Communication Sciences, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0389-6343

Funding

Advanced Bionics, LLC
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate intracochlear electrocochleography (ECochG) amplitude parameters during cochlear implantation (CI) using a novel multi-frequency ECochG algorithm.

methodsA multi-institutional, prospective cohort study was performed at 18 high-volume CI centers. The inclusion criteria were adults with sensorineural hearing loss and audiometric thresholds of ≤ 90 dB hearing level at 500 Hz undergoing CI with Advanced Bionics (Valencia, CA) Ultra 3D devices between 2024 and 2025. ECochG recordings were performed with simultaneous multi-frequency stimulation of four frequencies between 125 and 4000 Hz during cochlear implant insertion. Concurrent multi-frequency recording allowed extraction of amplitude and phase of each frequency individually. Post hoc analysis was performed to determine the difference in the number of drop alarms between single- and multi-frequency ECochG. An ECochG amplitude drop of 6 dB was defined as a drop alarm. Insertion track patterns were compared between single- and multi-frequency ECochG.

resultsOne hundred ninety-five ears were included. Mean number of drop alarms for the single-frequency algorithm was 1.72 (95% CI: 1.52, 1.92; median 1) compared to 0.42 (95% CI: 0.31, 0.53; median 0) for multi-frequency; p < 0.001. The number of Type C patterns (rise in amplitude during insertion followed by a drop) decreased with the multi-frequency ECochG algorithm compared to the single-frequency ECochG algorithm. The number of Type D patterns (no-response) decreased, indicating that multi-frequency ECochG generated more responses across the cochlea than single-frequency ECochG.

conclusionsA novel multi-frequency ECochG algorithm during CI is associated with fewer drop alarms and altered insertion track patterns, which may provide a more accurate assessment of the cochlear microenvironment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3:

Indexed as

Audiometry, Evoked ResponseClinical AlarmsCochlear ImplantationCochlear ImplantsHearing Loss, SensorineuralAlgorithmsFemaleHumansProspective Studiescochlear implantationECochGmulti‐frequency electrocochleography

Identifiers

PMID42084107
PMCPMC13569684

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.