Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
A Multicenter Comparison of 1-yr Functional Outcomes and Programming Differences Between the Advanced Bionics Mid-Scala and SlimJ Electrode Arrays.
Eitutis, Susan T; Vickers, Deborah A; Tebbutt, Karen; Thomas, Tisa; Jiang, Dan; de Klerk, Anel; Clemesha, Jennifer; Chung, Mark; Bance, Manohar L.
Afiliación
  • Vickers DA; Sound Laboratory, Cambridge Hearing Group, Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge.
  • Tebbutt K; Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust.
  • Thomas T; Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust.
  • Jiang D; Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust.
  • de Klerk A; Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust.
  • Clemesha J; Auditory Implant Department, Royal National ENT & Eastman Dental Hospitals, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.
  • Chung M; Auditory Implant Department, Royal National ENT & Eastman Dental Hospitals, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.
  • Bance ML; Cambridge Hearing Group, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, University of Cambridge.
Otol Neurotol ; 44(10): e730-e738, 2023 Dec 01.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37889939
OBJECTIVE: To determine if there is a difference in hearing outcomes or stimulation levels between Advanced Bionics straight and precurved arrays. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective chart review across three implant centers. SETTING: Tertiary centers for cochlear and auditory brainstem implantation. PATIENTS: One hundred fifteen pediatric and 205 adult cochlear implants (CIs) were reviewed. All patients were implanted under the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence 2009 guidelines with a HiRes Ultra SlimJ or Mid-Scala electrode array. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Hearing preservation after implantation, as well as CI-only listening scores for Bamford-Kowal-Bench sentences were compared 1 year after implantation. Stimulation levels for threshold and comfort levels were also compared 1 year after implantation. RESULTS: Hearing preservation was significantly better with the SlimJ compared with the Mid-Scala electrode array. Bamford-Kowal-Bench outcomes were not significantly different between the two arrays in any listening condition. Stimulation levels were not different between arrays but did vary across electrode contacts. At least one electrode was deactivated in 33% of implants but was more common for the SlimJ device. CONCLUSION: Modern straight and precurved arrays from Advanced Bionics did not differ in hearing performance or current requirements. Although hearing preservation was possible with both devices, the SlimJ array would still be the preferred electrode in cases where hearing preservation was a priority. Unfortunately, the SlimJ device was also prone to poor sound perception on basal electrodes. Further investigation is needed to determine if deactivated electrodes are associated with electrode position/migration, and if programming changes are needed to optimize the use of these high-frequency channels.
Asunto(s)

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Implantes Cocleares / Implantación Coclear Límite: Adult / Child / Humans Idioma: En Revista: Otol Neurotol Asunto de la revista: NEUROLOGIA / OTORRINOLARINGOLOGIA Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Implantes Cocleares / Implantación Coclear Límite: Adult / Child / Humans Idioma: En Revista: Otol Neurotol Asunto de la revista: NEUROLOGIA / OTORRINOLARINGOLOGIA Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Article
...