Literature DB >> 27262349

ECAP analysis in cochlear implant patients as a function of patient's age and electrode-design.

F Christov1, P Munder2, L Berg2, H Bagus2, S Lang2, D Arweiler-Harbeck2.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Electric compound action potentials (ECAPs) provide information about the nerve's and device's function in and after cochlear implantation. In general, lower ECAP values are expected to generate better results. Aim was an analysis of ECAPs in the course of time as a function of the patient's age and electrode design. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 2008 and 2013, 168 patients of eight defined age groups were included into the investigation. NRTs were measured intraoperatively, after 6 and after 12months.
RESULTS: The intraoperative mean value of ECAP was 174.14CL (current level) and decreased after 6months to 156.38CL. Highest ECAPs were achieved intraoperatively in the clusters "younger than 18months" (181.04CL) and "older than 80 years" (190.45CL). CI 422 showed apparently higher ECAP thresholds (182.69) during surgery than CI 24 RE (171.47) and CI 512 (170.64).
CONCLUSION: ECAPs are a well-established method to get information about the CI's and nerve's function during and after surgery. After initial higher values NRTs decrease after 6months and remain stable in the following controls. Very young and older patients tend to have higher thresholds than middle-aged groups. Perimodiolar electrodes are significantly attached to lower values because there is a closer nerve-electrode interaction.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Array; CI; Cochlear; ECAP; Electrode; Hearing loss; Implant; NRT; Perimodiolar; Threshold

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27262349     DOI: 10.1016/j.anorl.2016.04.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis        ISSN: 1879-7296            Impact factor:   2.080


  6 in total

1.  Comparative study of two different perimodiolar and a straight cochlear implant electrode array: surgical and audiological outcomes.

Authors:  Octavio Garaycochea; Raquel Manrique-Huarte; Carlos Lazaro; Alicia Huarte; Carlos Prieto; Marta Alvarez de Linera-Alperi; Manuel Manrique
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2019-10-21       Impact factor: 2.503

2.  Algorithm-Based Hearing and Speech Therapy Rehabilitation after Cochlear Implantation.

Authors:  Theda Eichler; Wiebke Rötz; Christoph Kayser; Felix Bröhl; Michael Römer; Arne Henning Witteborg; Franz Kummert; Tobias Sandmeier; Christoph Schulte; Patricia Stolz; Katharina Meyer; Holger Sudhoff; Ingo Todt
Journal:  Brain Sci       Date:  2022-04-29

3.  Assessment of cochlear trauma and telemetry measures after cochlear implantation: A comparative study between Nucleus® CI512 and CI532 electrode arrays.

Authors:  Domenico Cuda; Alessandra Murri
Journal:  Audiol Res       Date:  2019-07-11

4.  Relationship between Electrically Evoked Compound Action Potential Thresholds and Auditory, Language, and Speech Progress after Cochlear Implant Surgery.

Authors:  Masoud Motasaddi Zarandy; Navid Nourizadeh; Farzad Mobedshahi; Sadegh Jafarzadeh
Journal:  Iran J Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2018-07

5.  Optimized SNR-based ECAP threshold determination is comparable to the judgement of human evaluators.

Authors:  Lutz Gärtner; Philipp Spitzer; Kathrin Lauss; Marko Takanen; Thomas Lenarz; Sebastian Hoth
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-11-01       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Evaluation of hearing preservation in adults with a slim perimodiolar electrode.

Authors:  Sonja Ludwig; Niklas Riemann; Stefan Hans; Florian Christov; Johannes Maximilian Ludwig; Judith Saxe; Diana Arweiler-Harbeck
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2021-04-08       Impact factor: 2.503

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.