Electrocochleographic Patterns Predicting Increased Impedances and Hearing Loss after Cochlear Implantation.

OBJECTIVES: Different patterns of electrocochleographic responses along the electrode array after insertion of the cochlear implant electrode array have been described. However, the implications of these patterns remain unclear. Therefore, the aim of the study was to correlate different peri- and postoperative electrocochleographic patterns with four-point impedance measurements and preservation of residual hearing. DESIGN: Thirty-nine subjects with residual low-frequency hearing which were implanted with a slim-straight electrode array could prospectively be included. Intracochlear electrocochleographic recordings and four-point impedance measurements along the 22 electrodes of the array (EL, most apical EL22) were conducted immediately after complete insertion and 3 months after surgery. Hearing preservation was assessed after 3 months. RESULTS: In perioperative electrocochleographic recordings, 22 subjects (56%) showed the largest amplitude around the tip of the electrode array (apical-peak, AP, EL20 or EL22), whereas 17 subjects (44%) exhibited a maximum amplitude in more basal regions (mid-peak, MP, EL18 or lower). At 3 months, in six subjects with an AP pattern perioperatively, the location of the largest electrocochleographic response had shifted basally (apical-to-mid-peak, AP-MP). Latency was analyzed along the electrode array when this could be discerned. This was the case in 68 peri- and postoperative recordings (87% of all recordings, n = 78). The latency increased with increasing insertion depth in AP recordings (n = 38, median of EL with maximum latency shift = EL21). In MP recordings (n = 30), the maximum latency shift was detectable more basally (median EL12, p < 0.001). Four-point impedance measurements were available at both time points in 90% (n = 35) of all subjects. At the 3-month time point, recordings revealed lower impedances in the AP group (n = 15, mean = 222 Ω, SD = 63) than in the MP (n = 14, mean = 295 Ω, SD= 7 6) and AP-MP groups (n = 6, mean = 234 Ω, SD = 129; AP versus MP p = 0.026, AP versus AP-MP p = 0.023, MP versus AP-MP p > 0.999). The amplitudes of perioperative AP recordings showed a correlation with preoperative hearing thresholds ( r2 =0.351, p = 0.004). No such correlation was detectable in MP recordings ( r2 = 0.033, p = 0.484). Audiograms were available at both time points in 97% (n = 38) of all subjects. The mean postoperative hearing loss in the AP group was 13 dB (n = 16, SD = 9). A significantly larger hearing loss was detectable in the MP and AP-MP groups with 28 (n = 17, SD = 10) and 35 dB (n = 6, SD = 13), respectively (AP versus MP p = 0.002, AP versus AP-MP p = 0.002, MP versus AP-MP p = 0.926). CONCLUSION: MP and AP-MP response patterns of the electrocochleographic responses along the electrode array after cochlear implantation are correlated with higher four-point impedances and poorer postoperative hearing compared to AP response patterns. The higher impedances suggest that MP and AP-MP patterns are associated with increased intracochlear fibrosis.