ReviewEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2026
Outcomes of anatomy based planning in cochlear implantation: a meta-analysis of advancing precision otologic medicine.
Review in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the impact of anatomy-based planning (ABP) and individualized electrode array selection on cochlear implant outcomes, and to compare the effectiveness of precision-guided approaches versus conventional clinician-driven programming strategies. DATA SOURCES: Systematic searches of PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase were conducted for studies published between January 2000 and June 2025. REVIEW
methodsThis meta-analysis followed PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Eleven studies involving 291 post-lingually deafened adults were included. Only studies utilizing anatomy-based planning tools with quantifiable auditory and speech outcomes were analyzed. Data synthesis was performed using a fixed-effects model, and subgroup analyses were conducted based on surgical approach and outcome type.
resultsAll included studies demonstrated superior outcomes with ABP compared to conventional planning, with odds ratios ranging from 1.5 to 7.0. Pooled analysis revealed significant benefits in both speech-related (OR = 1.93, 95% CI: 1.56-2.40) and auditory/music-related outcomes (OR = 2.38, 95% CI: 1.98-2.86). Subgroup analysis confirmed consistent advantages of ABP across both round window and cochleostomy approaches. No study reported adverse intraoperative events directly attributable to ABP. Individualized electrode array selection based on cochlear duct length and angular insertion depth improved frequency-place alignment and auditory perception.
conclusionAnatomy-based planning significantly enhances cochlear implantation outcomes by optimizing electrode positioning, minimizing frequency-place mismatch, and improving speech and auditory performance. The integration of precision imaging and individualized planning tools represents a promising step toward personalized otologic surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III (Meta-analysis of non-randomized and randomized controlled trials).
Indexed as
Identifiers
42543436What 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.