Cochlear Implantation with the CI512 and CI532 Precurved Electrode Arrays: One-Year Speech Recognition and Intraoperative Thresholds of Electrically Evoked Compound Action Potentials.

INTRODUCTION: Precurved cochlear implant (CI) electrode arrays were developed in an attempt to improve the auditory outcome of cochlear implantation, which varies greatly. The recent CI532 (Cochlear Corp., Sydney, Australia) may offer further advantages as its electrode array is thinner than previous precurved CI electrode arrays. The aims here were to investigate 1-year postoperative speech recognition, intraoperative electrically evoked compound action potentials (ECAPs), and their possible relation in patients implanted with a CI532 or its predecessor CI512. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of data from 63 patients subjected to cochlear implantation at the Karolinska University Hospital, Sweden, was performed. Speech recognition of the implanted ear was evaluated using phonemically balanced monosyllabic Swedish words at 65 dB SPL. ECAPs were evaluated using the intraoperative ECAP threshold across ≥8 electrodes generated by the automated neural response telemetry of the CI. RESULTS: The median aided speech recognition score (SRS) 1 year after implantation was 52% (quartile 1 = 40%, quartile 3 = 60%, n = 63) and did not differ statistically significantly between patients with CI512 (n = 38) and CI532 (n = 25). The mean ECAP threshold was 188 CL (current level; SD = 15 CL, n = 54) intraoperatively and did not differ statistically significantly between patients with CI512 (n = 32) and CI532 (n = 22), but the threshold for each electrode varied more between patients with a CI512 (p < 0.0001). A higher mean ECAP threshold was associated with a worse SRS (Spearman's ρ = -0.46, p = 0.0004, n = 54). The association remained among those with a CI512 (Spearman's ρ = -0.62, p = 0.0001, n = 32) when stratified by CI electrode array. CONCLUSION: No statistically significant difference in speech recognition 1 year after cochlear implantation or in mean threshold of ECAP intraoperatively was found between patients with a CI512 and the more recent, slim CI532, but the ECAP thresholds varied more between those with a CI512. A statistically significant association between SRS and mean ECAP threshold was found, but stratified analysis suggests that the association may be true only for patients with a CI512.