耳蜗CI532细长模摩尔电极阵列对诱发复合动作电位和编程水平的影响

R. Greisiger, M. G. Heldahl, M. Myhrum, T. M. Sørensen, J. J. Dammerud, K. Rasmussen, Hilde Korslund, M. Bunne, G. Jablonski
{"title":"耳蜗CI532细长模摩尔电极阵列对诱发复合动作电位和编程水平的影响","authors":"R. Greisiger, M. G. Heldahl, M. Myhrum, T. M. Sørensen, J. J. Dammerud, K. Rasmussen, Hilde Korslund, M. Bunne, G. Jablonski","doi":"10.1159/000524256","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The first surgeries with CI532 showed an effect of the proximity of the electrode to the modiolus on the Evoked Compound Action Potentials (ECAPs). Objectives: Objectives of the study were to investigate the effect of the “pullback” procedure on intraoperative ECAP responses in three different electrode array positions and additionally to compare behavioral thresholds with the thresholds obtained in a group of patients using the standard insertion. The hypothesis of this study is that pullback will cause lower ECAPs and behavioral thresholds. Patients: The study included 40 patients, 20 in the pullback insertion group and 20 in the standard insertion group (without pullback). Method: During insertion of the CI532 electrode array, ECAP was performed in three different positions for the pullback group: at initial insertion, at over-insertion, and after pullback. Insertion was monitored by fluoroscopy. In the standard group, ECAP was performed at the initial position, which is also the final position. ECAP thresholds (T-ECAPs) were compared within subjects at the initial and the final position in the pullback group and between groups in the final positions of the pullback and standard groups. Programming levels (C- and T-levels) were compared between the two groups 1 year after switch-on. Results: Intraoperative measurements pullback shows lower average T-ECAPs after pullback compared to thresholds in initial position. Comparison of intraoperative T-ECAPs at the final positions showed no statistically significant difference between the pullback group and the standard insertion group. Furthermore, 1 year after switch-on there was no statistically significant difference in C- and T-levels between the two groups. Conclusion: The pullback maneuver of the CI532 electrode array after an over-insertion gave significantly lower T-ECAPs compared to the thresholds at the initial position. However, the between-groups analysis of pullback and standard insertion showed neither significantly different T-ECAPs nor different programming levels. Because T-ECAPs and programming levels vary considerably between subjects, large groups are required to detect differences between groups. Additionally, the effect pullback technique to preserving the residual hearing is not known yet.","PeriodicalId":8624,"journal":{"name":"Audiology and Neurotology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of Proximity to the Modiolus for the Cochlear CI532 Slim Modiolar Electrode Array on Evoked Compound Action Potentials and Programming Levels\",\"authors\":\"R. Greisiger, M. G. Heldahl, M. Myhrum, T. M. Sørensen, J. J. Dammerud, K. Rasmussen, Hilde Korslund, M. Bunne, G. Jablonski\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000524256\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: The first surgeries with CI532 showed an effect of the proximity of the electrode to the modiolus on the Evoked Compound Action Potentials (ECAPs). Objectives: Objectives of the study were to investigate the effect of the “pullback” procedure on intraoperative ECAP responses in three different electrode array positions and additionally to compare behavioral thresholds with the thresholds obtained in a group of patients using the standard insertion. The hypothesis of this study is that pullback will cause lower ECAPs and behavioral thresholds. Patients: The study included 40 patients, 20 in the pullback insertion group and 20 in the standard insertion group (without pullback). Method: During insertion of the CI532 electrode array, ECAP was performed in three different positions for the pullback group: at initial insertion, at over-insertion, and after pullback. Insertion was monitored by fluoroscopy. In the standard group, ECAP was performed at the initial position, which is also the final position. ECAP thresholds (T-ECAPs) were compared within subjects at the initial and the final position in the pullback group and between groups in the final positions of the pullback and standard groups. Programming levels (C- and T-levels) were compared between the two groups 1 year after switch-on. Results: Intraoperative measurements pullback shows lower average T-ECAPs after pullback compared to thresholds in initial position. Comparison of intraoperative T-ECAPs at the final positions showed no statistically significant difference between the pullback group and the standard insertion group. Furthermore, 1 year after switch-on there was no statistically significant difference in C- and T-levels between the two groups. Conclusion: The pullback maneuver of the CI532 electrode array after an over-insertion gave significantly lower T-ECAPs compared to the thresholds at the initial position. However, the between-groups analysis of pullback and standard insertion showed neither significantly different T-ECAPs nor different programming levels. Because T-ECAPs and programming levels vary considerably between subjects, large groups are required to detect differences between groups. Additionally, the effect pullback technique to preserving the residual hearing is not known yet.\",\"PeriodicalId\":8624,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Audiology and Neurotology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Audiology and Neurotology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000524256\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Audiology and Neurotology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000524256","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:第一次使用CI532的手术显示了电极靠近小丘对诱发复合动作电位(ECAPs)的影响。目的:本研究的目的是研究“回拉”过程对三种不同电极阵列位置的术中ECAP反应的影响,并将行为阈值与使用标准插入的一组患者获得的阈值进行比较。本研究的假设是,回拉会导致较低的ecap和行为阈值。患者:本研究包括40例患者,20例为回拉插入组,20例为标准插入组(无回拉)。方法:在CI532电极阵列插入过程中,回拉组在初始插入时、过插入时和回拉后三个不同位置进行ECAP。透视检查插入情况。在标准组,ECAP在初始位置进行,这也是最终位置。比较受试者在拉回组初始位置和最终位置的ECAP阈值(t -ECAP),以及各组之间在拉回组和标准组最终位置的ECAP阈值。两组在开启后1年比较编程水平(C和t水平)。结果:术中测量显示,与初始位置的阈值相比,回拉后的平均T-ECAPs较低。术中t - ecap在最终位置的比较显示,后拉组与标准插入组之间无统计学差异。此外,两组在治疗1年后C-和t -水平无统计学差异。结论:与初始位置的阈值相比,过度插入后的CI532电极阵列的回拉操作可显着降低T-ECAPs。然而,回拉和标准插入的组间分析显示t - ecap没有显著差异,编程水平也没有差异。由于t - ecap和编程水平在受试者之间差异很大,因此需要大的组来检测组之间的差异。此外,保留残余听力的效果回拉技术目前还不清楚。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Effect of Proximity to the Modiolus for the Cochlear CI532 Slim Modiolar Electrode Array on Evoked Compound Action Potentials and Programming Levels
Background: The first surgeries with CI532 showed an effect of the proximity of the electrode to the modiolus on the Evoked Compound Action Potentials (ECAPs). Objectives: Objectives of the study were to investigate the effect of the “pullback” procedure on intraoperative ECAP responses in three different electrode array positions and additionally to compare behavioral thresholds with the thresholds obtained in a group of patients using the standard insertion. The hypothesis of this study is that pullback will cause lower ECAPs and behavioral thresholds. Patients: The study included 40 patients, 20 in the pullback insertion group and 20 in the standard insertion group (without pullback). Method: During insertion of the CI532 electrode array, ECAP was performed in three different positions for the pullback group: at initial insertion, at over-insertion, and after pullback. Insertion was monitored by fluoroscopy. In the standard group, ECAP was performed at the initial position, which is also the final position. ECAP thresholds (T-ECAPs) were compared within subjects at the initial and the final position in the pullback group and between groups in the final positions of the pullback and standard groups. Programming levels (C- and T-levels) were compared between the two groups 1 year after switch-on. Results: Intraoperative measurements pullback shows lower average T-ECAPs after pullback compared to thresholds in initial position. Comparison of intraoperative T-ECAPs at the final positions showed no statistically significant difference between the pullback group and the standard insertion group. Furthermore, 1 year after switch-on there was no statistically significant difference in C- and T-levels between the two groups. Conclusion: The pullback maneuver of the CI532 electrode array after an over-insertion gave significantly lower T-ECAPs compared to the thresholds at the initial position. However, the between-groups analysis of pullback and standard insertion showed neither significantly different T-ECAPs nor different programming levels. Because T-ECAPs and programming levels vary considerably between subjects, large groups are required to detect differences between groups. Additionally, the effect pullback technique to preserving the residual hearing is not known yet.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Low-Frequency Audiometric Notch and Vascular Risk in Age-Related Hearing Loss Hearing, Language, and General School Performance in Children with Cleft Lip/Palate Waiting for Alveolar and Hard Palate Reconstruction at the Age of Mixed Dentition Effects of Bilateral Cochlear Implantation on Binaural Listening Tasks for Younger and Older Adults Effects of Sequential Bilateral Cochlear Implantation in Children: Evidence from Speech-Evoked Cortical Potentials and Tests of Speech Perception Poor Performer: A Distinct Entity in Cochlear Implant Users?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1