OBJECTIVE: Characterize differences in adult cochlear implant outcomes and programming parameters for a straight (CI422/522) and a precurved (CI532) electrode array. SETTING: Cochlear implant (CI) program at a tertiary otologic center. PATIENTS: Fifty-eight adults were included in the study; 29 were implanted with CI422 or CI522 and 29 were implanted with CI532. Each CI532 recipient was matched to a CI422/522 recipient in terms of age and preoperative hearing thresholds for comparison purposes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant (CNC) words, AzBio sentences, residual audiometric thresholds, and Speech Spatial Qualities (SSQ) questionnaire collected 6 months postoperatively were used to characterize outcomes. Pulse duration, maxima, impedances, and overall charge measurements were used to characterize programming parameters. RESULTS: Postoperative unaided low frequency pure-tone average (LFPTA) was significantly better for the CI532 group. CNC scores were significantly better for the CI532 group. Impedances and pulse duration were significantly lower for the CI532 group, but there was no difference in overall charge between the groups. CONCLUSION: The CI532 group showed either similar or statistically superior results on all measures when compared with the CI422/522 suggesting that the CI532 electrode may be an advantageous substitute for the CI522.
OBJECTIVE: Characterize differences in adult cochlear implant outcomes and programming parameters for a straight (CI422/522) and a precurved (CI532) electrode array. SETTING: Cochlear implant (CI) program at a tertiary otologic center. PATIENTS: Fifty-eight adults were included in the study; 29 were implanted with CI422 or CI522 and 29 were implanted with CI532. Each CI532 recipient was matched to a CI422/522 recipient in terms of age and preoperative hearing thresholds for comparison purposes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant (CNC) words, AzBio sentences, residual audiometric thresholds, and Speech Spatial Qualities (SSQ) questionnaire collected 6 months postoperatively were used to characterize outcomes. Pulse duration, maxima, impedances, and overall charge measurements were used to characterize programming parameters. RESULTS: Postoperative unaided low frequency pure-tone average (LFPTA) was significantly better for the CI532 group. CNC scores were significantly better for the CI532 group. Impedances and pulse duration were significantly lower for the CI532 group, but there was no difference in overall charge between the groups. CONCLUSION: The CI532 group showed either similar or statistically superior results on all measures when compared with the CI422/522 suggesting that the CI532 electrode may be an advantageous substitute for the CI522.
Authors: M Tykocinski; L T Cohen; B C Pyman; T Roland; C Treaba; J Palamara; M C Dahm; R K Shepherd; J Xu; R S Cowan; N L Cohen; G M Clark Journal: Am J Otol Date: 2000-03
Authors: René H Gifford; Timothy J Davis; Linsey W Sunderhaus; Christine Menapace; Barbara Buck; Jillian Crosson; Lori O'Neill; Anne Beiter; Phil Segel Journal: Ear Hear Date: 2017 Sep/Oct Impact factor: 3.570
Authors: Peter Blamey; Françoise Artieres; Deniz Başkent; François Bergeron; Andy Beynon; Elaine Burke; Norbert Dillier; Richard Dowell; Bernard Fraysse; Stéphane Gallégo; Paul J Govaerts; Kevin Green; Alexander M Huber; Andrea Kleine-Punte; Bert Maat; Mathieu Marx; Deborah Mawman; Isabelle Mosnier; Alec Fitzgerald O'Connor; Stephen O'Leary; Alexandra Rousset; Karen Schauwers; Henryk Skarzynski; Piotr H Skarzynski; Olivier Sterkers; Assia Terranti; Eric Truy; Paul Van de Heyning; Fréderic Venail; Christophe Vincent; Diane S Lazard Journal: Audiol Neurootol Date: 2012-10-19 Impact factor: 1.854
Authors: Laura K Holden; Jill B Firszt; Ruth M Reeder; Rosalie M Uchanski; Noël Y Dwyer; Timothy A Holden Journal: Otol Neurotol Date: 2016-12 Impact factor: 2.311
Authors: Diane S Lazard; Christophe Vincent; Frédéric Venail; Paul Van de Heyning; Eric Truy; Olivier Sterkers; Piotr H Skarzynski; Henryk Skarzynski; Karen Schauwers; Stephen O'Leary; Deborah Mawman; Bert Maat; Andrea Kleine-Punte; Alexander M Huber; Kevin Green; Paul J Govaerts; Bernard Fraysse; Richard Dowell; Norbert Dillier; Elaine Burke; Andy Beynon; François Bergeron; Deniz Başkent; Françoise Artières; Peter J Blamey Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-11-09 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Matthew J Goupell; Jack H Noble; Sandeep A Phatak; Elizabeth Kolberg; Miranda Cleary; Olga A Stakhovskaya; Kenneth K Jensen; Michael Hoa; Hung Jeffrey Kim; Joshua G W Bernstein Journal: Otol Neurotol Date: 2022-07-01 Impact factor: 2.619
Authors: Floris Heutink; Berit M Verbist; Willem-Jan van der Woude; Tamara J Meulman; Jeroen J Briaire; Johan H M Frijns; Priya Vart; Emmanuel A M Mylanus; Wendy J Huinck Journal: Ear Hear Date: 2021 July/Aug Impact factor: 3.562
Authors: Matthias Hey; Nicole Neben; Timo Stöver; Uwe Baumann; Alexander Mewes; Tim Liebscher; Mark Schüssler; Antje Aschendorff; Thomas Wesarg; Andreas Büchner; Paula Greenham; Ulrich Hoppe Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2020-03-05 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Tim M Klabbers; Floris Heutink; Wendy J Huinck; Willem-Jan van der Woude; Berit M Verbist; Emmanuel A M Mylanus Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2022-01-18 Impact factor: 3.236