Cochlear implants: current status and future potential

References

• Wilson BS, Dorman MF. Cochlear implants: a remarkable past and a brilliant future. Hear. Res.242(1–2), 3–21 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strenzke N, Pauli-Magnus D, Meyer A, Brandt A, Maier H, Moser T. [Update on physiology and pathophysiology of the inner ear: pathomechanisms of sensorineural hearing loss]. HNO56(1), 27–36 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeng FG, Rebscher S, Harrison WV, Sun X, Feng H. Cochlear implants: system design, integration and evaluation. IEEE Rev. Biomed. Eng.1, 115–142 (2008).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fu QJ, Nogaki G. Noise susceptibility of cochlear implant users: the role of spectral resolution and smearing. J. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol.6(1), 19–27 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landsberger DM, Srinivasan AG. Virtual channel discrimination is improved by current focusing in cochlear implant recipients. Hear. Res.254(1–2), 34–41 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drennan WR, Won JH, Dasika VK, Rubinstein JT. Effects of temporal fine structure on the lateralization of speech and on speech understanding in noise. J. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol.8(3), 373–383 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stickney GS, Assmann PF, Chang J, Zeng FG. Effects of cochlear implant processing and fundamental frequency on the intelligibility of competing sentences. J. Acoust. Soc. Am.122(2), 1069–1078 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gfeller K, Turner C, Oleson J et al. Accuracy of cochlear implant recipients on pitch perception, melody recognition, and speech reception in noise. Ear Hear.28(3), 412–423 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang YT, Yang HM, Lin YH, Liu SH, Wu JL. Tone discrimination and speech perception benefit in Mandarin-speaking children fit with HiRes fidelity 120 sound processing. Otol. Neurotol.30(6), 750–757 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zierhofer CM, Schatzer R. Simultaneous intracochlear stimulation based on channel interaction compensation: analysis and first results. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng.55(7), 1907–1916 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Magnusson L. Comparison of the fine structure processing (FSP) strategy and the CIS strategy used in the MED-EL cochlear implant system: speech intelligibility and music sound quality. Int. J. Audiol.50(4), 279–287 (2011).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arnoldner C, Riss D, Brunner M, Durisin M, Baumgartner WD, Hamzavi JS. Speech and music perception with the new fine structure speech coding strategy: preliminary results. Acta Otolaryngol.127(12), 1298–1303 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hochmair I, Nopp P, Jolly C et al. MED-EL Cochlear implants: state of the art and a glimpse into the future. Trends Amplif.10(4), 201–219 (2006).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Riss D, Arnoldner C, Baumgartner WD, Kaider A, Hamzavi JS. A new fine structure speech coding strategy: speech perception at a reduced number of channels. Otol. Neurotol.29(6), 784–788 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koch DB, Downing M, Osberger MJ, Litvak L. Using current steering to increase spectral resolution in CII and HiRes 90K users. Ear Hear.28(Suppl. 2), S38–S41 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brendel M, Buechner A, Krueger B, Frohne-Buechner C, Lenarz T. Evaluation of the Harmony soundprocessor in combination with the speech coding strategy HiRes 120. Otol. Neurotol.29(2), 199–202 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buechner A, Brendel M, Krueger B et al. Current steering and results from novel speech coding strategies. Otol. Neurotol.29(2), 203–207 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Firszt JB, Holden LK, Reeder RM, Skinner MW. Speech recognition in cochlear implant recipients: comparison of standard HiRes and HiRes 120 sound processing. Otol. Neurotol.30(2), 146–152 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Donaldson GS, Dawson PK, Borden LZ. Within-subjects comparison of the HiRes and Fidelity120 speech processing strategies: speech perception and its relation to place-pitch sensitivity. Ear Hear. (2010).
   Google Scholar
• Schatzer R, Krenmayr A, Au DK, Kals M, Zierhofer C. Temporal fine structure in cochlear implants: preliminary speech perception results in Cantonese-speaking implant users. Acta Otolaryngol.130(9), 1031–1039 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buchner A, Nogueira W, Edler B, Battmer RD, Lenarz T. Results from a psychoacoustic model-based strategy for the nucleus-24 and freedom cochlear implants. Otol. Neurotol.29(2), 189–192 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Littlefield PD, Vujanovic I, Mundi J, Matic AI, Richter CP. Laser stimulation of single auditory nerve fibers. Laryngoscope120(10), 2071–2082 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rajguru SM, Matic AI, Robinson AM et al. Optical cochlear implants: evaluation of surgical approach and laser parameters in cats. Hear. Res.269(1–2), 102–111 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richter CP, Bayon R, Izzo AD et al. Optical stimulation of auditory neurons: effects of acute and chronic deafening. Hear. Res.242(1–2), 42–51 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pettingill LN, Richardson RT, Wise AK, O’Leary SJ, Shepherd RK. Neurotrophic factors and neural prostheses: potential clinical applications based upon findings in the auditory system. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng.54(6 Pt 1), 1138–1148 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rejali D, Lee VA, Abrashkin KA, Humayun N, Swiderski DL, Raphael Y. Cochlear implants and ex vivo BDNF gene therapy protect spiral ganglion neurons. Hear. Res.228(1–2), 180–187 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vieira M, Christensen BL, Wheeler BC, Feng AS, Kollmar R. Survival and stimulation of neurite outgrowth in a serum-free culture of spiral ganglion neurons from adult mice. Hear. Res.230(1–2), 17–23 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hendricks JL, Chikar JA, Crumling MA, Raphael Y, Martin DC. Localized cell and drug delivery for auditory prostheses. Hear. Res.242(1–2), 117–131 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Middlebrooks JC, Snyder RL. Selective electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve activates a pathway specialized for high temporal acuity. J. Neurosci.30(5), 1937–1946 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Middlebrooks JC, Snyder RL. Auditory prosthesis with a penetrating nerve array. J. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol.8(2), 258–279 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Middlebrooks JC, Snyder RL. Intraneural stimulation for auditory prosthesis: modiolar trunk and intracranial stimulation sites. Hear. Res.242(1–2), 52–63 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lenarz T, Stover T, Buechner A et al. Temporal bone results and hearing preservation with a new straight electrode. Audiol. Neurootol.11(Suppl. 1), 34–41 (2006).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lenarz T, Stover T, Buechner A, Lesinski-Schiedat A, Patrick J, Pesch J. Hearing conservation surgery using the Hybrid-L electrode. Results from the first clinical trial at the Medical University of Hannover. Audiol. Neurootol.14(Suppl. 1), 22–31 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Finley CC, Holden TA, Holden LK et al. Role of electrode placement as a contributor to variability in cochlear implant outcomes. Otol. Neurotol.29(7), 920–928 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee J, Nadol JB Jr, Eddington DK. Depth of electrode insertion and postoperative performance in humans with cochlear implants: a histopathologic study. Audiol. Neurootol.15(5), 323–331 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verbist BM, Skinner MW, Cohen LT et al. Consensus panel on a cochlear coordinate system applicable in histologic, physiologic, and radiologic studies of the human cochlea. Otol. Neurotol.31(5), 722–730 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verbist BM, Joemai RM, Briaire JJ, Teeuwisse WM, Veldkamp WJ, Frijns JH. Cochlear coordinates in regard to cochlear implantation: a clinically individually applicable 3 dimensional CT-based method. Otol. Neurotol.31(5), 738–744 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chung K, Zeng FG. Using hearing aid adaptive directional microphones to enhance cochlear implant performance. Hear. Res.250(1–2), 27–37 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buechner A, Brendel M, Saalfeld H, Litvak L, Frohne-Buechner C, Lenarz T. Results of a pilot study with a signal enhancement algorithm for HiRes 120 cochlear implant users. Otol. Neurotol.31(9), 1386–1390 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roland JT Jr, Cosetti M, Wang KH, Immerman S, Waltzman SB. Cochlear implantation in the very young child: long-term safety and efficacy. Laryngoscope119(11), 2205–2210 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yoshinaga-Itano C. Early intervention after universal neonatal hearing screening: impact on outcomes. Ment. Retard. Dev. Disabil. Res. Rev.9(4), 252–266 (2003).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Moeller MP, Tomblin JB, Yoshinaga-Itano C, Connor CM, Jerger S. Current state of knowledge: language and literacy of children with hearing impairment. Ear Hear.28(6), 740–753 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Korver AM, Konings S, Dekker FW et al. Newborn hearing screening vs later hearing screening and developmental outcomes in children with permanent childhood hearing impairment. JAMA304(15), 1701–1708 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ball RS. The Gesell Developmental Schedules: Arnold Gesell (1880–1961). J. Abnorm. Child Psychol.5(3), 233–239 (1977).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daemers K, Yperman M, De Beukelaer C, De Saegher G, De Ceulaer G, Govaerts PJ. Normative data of the A(section)E discrimination and identification tests in preverbal children. Cochlear Implants Int.7(2), 107–116 (2006).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Govaerts PJ, Daemers K, Yperman M, De Beukelaer C, De Saegher G, De Ceulaer G. Auditory speech sounds evaluation (A(section)E): a new test to assess detection, discrimination and identification in hearing impairment. Cochlear Implants Int.7(2), 92–106 (2006).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dettman SJ, Pinder D, Briggs RJ, Dowell RC, Leigh JR. Communication development in children who receive the cochlear implant younger than 12 months: risks versus benefits. Ear Hear.28(2 Suppl.), S11–S18 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valencia DM, Rimell FL, Friedman BJ, Oblander MR, Helmbrecht J. Cochlear implantation in infants less than 12 months of age. Int. J. Pediatr. Otorhinolaryngol.72(6), 767–773 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miyamoto RT, Hay-McCutcheon MJ, Kirk KI, Houston DM, Bergeson-Dana T. Language skills of profoundly deaf children who received cochlear implants under 12 months of age: a preliminary study. Acta Otolaryngol.128(4), 373–377 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Raeve L. A longitudinal study on auditory perception and speech intelligibility in deaf children implanted younger than 18 months in comparison to those implanted at later ages. Otol. Neurotol.31(8), 1261–1267 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tait M, De Raeve L, Nikolopoulos TP. Deaf children with cochlear implants before the age of 1 year: comparison of preverbal communication with normally hearing children. Int. J. Pediatr. Otorhinolaryngol.71(10), 1605–1611 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holt RF, Svirsky MA. An exploratory look at pediatric cochlear implantation: is earliest always best? Ear Hear.29(4), 492–511 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niparko JK, Tobey EA, Thal DJ et al. Spoken language development in children following cochlear implantation. JAMA303(15), 1498–1506 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schauwers K, Gillis S, Govaerts PJ. The characteristics of prelexical babbling after cochlear implantation between 5 and 20 months of age. Ear Hear.29(4), 627–637 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nott P, Cowan R, Brown PM, Wigglesworth G. Early language development in children with profound hearing loss fitted with a device at a young age: part I – the time period taken to acquire first words and first word combinations. Ear Hear.30(5), 526–540 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klop WM, Briaire JJ, Stiggelbout AM, Frijns JH. Cochlear implant outcomes and quality of life in adults with prelingual deafness. Laryngoscope117(11), 1982–1987 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arisi E, Forti S, Pagani D et al. Cochlear implantation in adolescents with prelinguistic deafness. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg.142(6), 804–808 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Santarelli R, De Filippi R, Genovese E, Arslan E. Cochlear implantation outcome in prelingually deafened young adults. Audiol. Neurootol.13(4), 257–265 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yoshida H, Kanda Y, Miyamoto I, Fukuda T, Takahashi H. Cochlear implantation on prelingually deafened adults. Auris Nasus Larynx35(3), 349–352 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kos MI, Deriaz M, Guyot JP, Pelizzone M. What can be expected from a late cochlear implantation? Int. J. Pediatr. Otorhinolaryngol.73(2), 189–193 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Budenz CL, Cosetti MK, Coelho DH et al. The effects of cochlear implantation on speech perception in older adults. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc.59(3), 446–453 (2011).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coelho DH, Yeh J, Kim JT, Lalwani AK. Cochlear implantation is associated with minimal anesthetic risk in the elderly. Laryngoscope, 119(2), 355–358 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eshraghi AA, Rodriguez M, Balkany TJ et al. Cochlear implant surgery in patients more than seventy-nine years old. Laryngoscope119(6), 1180–1183 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carlson ML, Breen JT, Gifford RH et al. Cochlear implantation in the octogenarian and nonagenarian. Otol. Neurotol.31(8), 1343–1349 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahncke HW, Bronstone A, Merzenich MM. Brain plasticity and functional losses in the aged: scientific bases for a novel intervention. Prog. Brain Res.157, 81–109 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dickstein DL, Kabaso D, Rocher AB, Luebke JI, Wearne SL, Hof PR. Changes in the structural complexity of the aged brain. Aging Cell6(3), 275–284 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vermeire K, Brokx JP, Wuyts FL, Cochet E, Hofkens A, Van de Heyning PH. Quality-of-life benefit from cochlear implantation in the elderly. Otol. Neurotol.26(2), 188–195 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rance G, Barker EJ. Speech and language outcomes in children with auditory neuropathy/dys-synchrony managed with either cochlear implants or hearing aids. Int. J. Audiol.48(6), 313–320 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibson WP, Sanli H. Auditory neuropathy: an update. Ear Hear.28(Suppl. 2), S102–S106 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teagle HF, Roush PA, Woodard JS et al. Cochlear implantation in children with auditory neuropathy spectrum disorder. Ear Hear.31(3), 325–335 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson KC, DesJardin JL, Barker DH, Quittner AL, Winter ME. Assessing joint attention and symbolic play in children with cochlear implants and multiple disabilities: two case studies. Otol. Neurotol.29(2), 246–250 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meinzen-Derr J, Wiley S, Grether S, Choo DI. Language performance in children with cochlear implants and additional disabilities. Laryngoscope120(2), 405–413 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berrettini S, Forli F, Genovese E et al. Cochlear implantation in deaf children with associated disabilities: challenges and outcomes. Int. J. Audiol.47(4), 199–208 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daneshi A, Hassanzadeh S. Cochlear implantation in prelingually deaf persons with additional disability. J. Laryngol. Otol.121(7), 635–638 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lanson BG, Green JE, Roland JT Jr, Lalwani AK, Waltzman SB. Cochlear implantation in children with CHARGE syndrome: therapeutic decisions and outcomes. Laryngoscope117(7), 1260–1266 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lorens A, Polak M, Piotrowska A, Skarzynski H. Outcomes of treatment of partial deafness with cochlear implantation: a DUET study. Laryngoscope118(2), 288–294 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Helbig S, Baumann U, Helbig M, von Malsen-Waldkirch N, Gstoettner W. A new combined speech processor for electric and acoustic stimulation – eight months experience. ORL J. Otorhinolaryngol. Relat. Spec.70(6), 359–365 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skarzynski H, Lorens A. Electric acoustic stimulation in children. Adv. Otorhinolaryngol.67, 135–143 (2010).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Buchner A, Schussler M, Battmer RD, Stover T, Lesinski-Schiedat A, Lenarz T. Impact of low-frequency hearing. Audiol. Neurootol.14(Suppl. 1), 8–13 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roland JT, Shapiro WS, Waltzman SB. Preliminary results of Nucleus L24 in the United States. Presented at: International Conference on Cochlear Implants and Other Implantable Auditory Technologies. Stockholm, Sweden, 30 June – 3 July 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Helbig S, Baumann U. Acceptance and fitting of the DUET device – a combined speech processor for electric acoustic stimulation. Adv. Otorhinolaryngol.67, 81–87 (2010).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zeitler DM, Kessler MA, Terushkin V et al. Speech perception benefits of sequential bilateral cochlear implantation in children and adults: a retrospective analysis. Otol. Neurotol.29(3), 314–325 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Litovsky R, Harris S, Born M. Acquisition of spatial hearing abilities in two-year-old children: role of auditory experience and bilateral cochlear implantation. J. Acoust. Soc. Am.128(4), 2425 (2010).
   Google Scholar
• Litovsky R, Misurelli S, Godar S. Source segregation in noisy environments by children with normal hearing and bilateral cochlear implants. J. Acoust. Soc. Am.128(4), 2425 (2010).
   Google Scholar
• Litovsky RY, Parkinson A, Arcaroli J. Spatial hearing and speech intelligibility in bilateral cochlear implant users. Ear Hear.30(4), 419–431 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grieco-Calub TM, Litovsky RY. Sound localization skills in children who use bilateral cochlear implants and in children with normal acoustic hearing. Ear Hear.31(5), 645–656 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laske RD, Veraguth D, Dillier N, Binkert A, Holzmann D, Huber AM. Subjective and objective results after bilateral cochlear implantation in adults. Otol. Neurotol.30(3), 313–318 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koch DB, Soli SD, Downing M, Osberger MJ. Simultaneous bilateral cochlear implantation: prospective study in adults. Cochlear Implants Int. DOI: 10.1002/cii.413 (2009) (Epub ahead of print).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Godar SP, Litovsky RY. Experience with bilateral cochlear implants improves sound localization acuity in children. Otol. Neurotol.31(8), 1287–1292 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sparreboom M, van Schoonhoven J, van Zanten BG et al. The effectiveness of bilateral cochlear implants for severe-to-profound deafness in children: a systematic review. Otol. Neurotol.31(7), 1062–1071 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mok M, Galvin KL, Dowell RC, McKay CM. Speech perception benefit for children with a cochlear implant and a hearing aid in opposite ears and children with bilateral cochlear implants. Audiol. Neurootol.15(1), 44–56 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Deun L, van Wieringen A, Scherf F et al. Earlier intervention leads to better sound localization in children with bilateral cochlear implants. Audiol. Neurootol.15(1), 7–17 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunn CC, Noble W, Tyler RS, Kordus M, Gantz BJ, Ji H. Bilateral and unilateral cochlear implant users compared on speech perception in noise. Ear Hear.31(2), 296–298 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galvin KL, Mok M, Dowell RC, Briggs RJ. Speech detection and localization results and clinical outcomes for children receiving sequential bilateral cochlear implants before four years of age. Int. J. Audiol.47(10), 636–646 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Summerfield AQ, Lovett RE, Bellenger H, Batten G. Estimates of the cost–effectiveness of pediatric bilateral cochlear implantation. Ear Hear.31(5), 611–624 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scherf F, Van Deun L, van Wieringen A et al. Subjective benefits of sequential bilateral cochlear implantation in young children after 18 months of implant use. ORL J. Otorhinolaryngol. Relat. Spec.71(2), 112–121 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gordon KA, Papsin BC. Benefits of short interimplant delays in children receiving bilateral cochlear implants. Otol. Neurotol.30(3), 319–331 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mok M, Galvin KL, Dowell RC, McKay CM. Spatial unmasking and binaural advantage for children with normal hearing, a cochlear implant and a hearing aid, and bilateral implants. Audiol. Neurootol.12(5), 295–306 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bond M, Mealing S, Anderson R et al. The effectiveness and cost–effectiveness of cochlear implants for severe to profound deafness in children and adults: a systematic review and economic model. Health Technol. Assess.13(44), 1–330 (2009).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arndt S, Aschendorff A, Laszig R et al. Comparison of pseudobinaural hearing to real binaural hearing rehabilitation after cochlear implantation in patients with unilateral deafness and tinnitus. Otol. Neurotol.32(1), 39–47 (2011).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vermeire K, Nobbe A, Schleich P, Nopp P, Voormolen MH, Van de Heyning PH. Neural tonotopy in cochlear implants: an evaluation in unilateral cochlear implant patients with unilateral deafness and tinnitus. Hear. Res.245(1–2), 98–106 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vermeire K, Van de Heyning P. Binaural hearing after cochlear implantation in subjects with unilateral sensorineural deafness and tinnitus. Audiol. Neurootol.14(3), 163–171 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kleinjung T, Steffens T, Strutz J, Langguth B. Curing tinnitus with a cochlear implant in a patient with unilateral sudden deafness: a case report. Cases J.2, 7462 (2009).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Loh C, Jiang D, Dezso A, Fitzgerald O’Connor A. Non-sutured fixation of cochlear implants using a minimally-invasive approach. Clin. Otolaryngol.33(3), 259–261 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balkany TJ, Whitley M, Shapira Y et al. The temporalis pocket technique for cochlear implantation: an anatomic and clinical study. Otol. Neurotol.30(7), 903–907 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adunka OF, Buchman CA. Cochlear implant fixation in children using periosteal sutures. Otol. Neurotol.28(6), 768–770 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Molony TB, Giles JE, Thompson TL, Motamedi KK. Device fixation in cochlear implantation: is bone anchoring necessary? Laryngoscope120(9), 1837–1839 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Souter MA, Briggs RJ, Wright CG, Roland PS. Round window insertion of precurved perimodiolar electrode arrays: how successful is it? Otol. Neurotol.32(1), 58–63 (2011).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adunka OF, Buchman CA. Scala tympani cochleostomy I: results of a survey. Laryngoscope117(12), 2187–2194 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shapira Y, Eshraghi AA, Balkany TJ. The perceived angle of the round window affects electrode insertion trauma in round window insertion – an anatomical study. Acta Otolaryngol.131(3), 284–289 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cosetti MK, Shapiro WH, Green JE et al. Intraoperative neural response telemetry as a predictor of performance. Otol. Neurotol.31(7), 1095–1099 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shapiro WH, Huang T, Shaw T, Roland JT Jr, Lalwani AK. Remote intraoperative monitoring during cochlear implant surgery is feasible and efficient. Otol. Neurotol.29(4), 495–498 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trotter MI, Backhouse S, Wagstaff S, Hollow R, Briggs RJ. Classification of cochlear implant failures and explantation: the Melbourne experience, 1982–2006. Cochlear Implants Int.10(Suppl. 1), 105–110 (2009).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zeitler DM, Lalwani AK, Roland JT Jr, Habib MG, Gudis D, Waltzman SB. The effects of cochlear implant electrode deactivation on speech perception and in predicting device failure. Otol. Neurotol.30(1), 7–13 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeitler DM, Budenz CL, Roland JT Jr. Revision cochlear implantation. Curr. Opin. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg.17(5), 334–338 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gosepath J, Lippert K, Keilmann A, Mann WJ. Analysis of fifty-six cochlear implant device failures. ORL J. Otorhinolaryngol. Relat. Spec.71(3), 142–147 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venail F, Sicard M, Piron JP et al. Reliability and complications of 500 consecutive cochlear implantations. Arch. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg.134(12), 1276–1281 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Battmer RD, Backous DD, Balkany TJ et al. International classification of reliability for implanted cochlear implant receiver stimulators. Otol. Neurotol.31(8), 1190–1193 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Battmer RD, Linz B, Lenarz T. A review of device failure in more than 23 years of clinical experience of a cochlear implant program with more than 3,400 implantees. Otol. Neurotol.30(4), 455–463 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carlson ML, Archibald DJ, Dabade TS et al. Prevalence and timing of individual cochlear implant electrode failures. Otol. Neurotol.31(6), 893–898 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fu QJ, Galvin JJ 3rd. Perceptual learning and auditory training in cochlear implant recipients. Trends Amplif.11(3), 193–205 (2007).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fu QJ, Galvin JJ 3rd. Maximizing cochlear implant patients’ performance with advanced speech training procedures. Hear. Res.242(1–2), 198–208 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen JK, Chuang AY, McMahon C, Hsieh JC, Tung TH, Li LP. Music training improves pitch perception in prelingually deafened children with cochlear implants. Pediatrics125(4), e793–e800 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nogaki G, Fu QJ, Galvin JJ 3rd. Effect of training rate on recognition of spectrally shifted speech. Ear Hear.28(2), 132–140 (2007).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tremblay KL, Shahin AJ, Picton T, Ross B. Auditory training alters the physiological detection of stimulus-specific cues in humans. Clin. Neurophysiol.120(1), 128–135 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen N. The totally implantable cochlear implant. Ear Hear.28(Suppl. 2), S100–S101 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Briggs RJ, Eder HC, Seligman PM et al. Initial clinical experience with a totally implantable cochlear implant research device. Otol. Neurotol.29(2), 114–119 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tajudeen BA, Waltzman SB, Jethanamest D, Svirsky MA. Speech perception in congenitally deaf children receiving cochlear implants in the first year of life. Otol. Neurotol.31(8), 1254–1260 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang J, Wei W, Ding J, Roland JT Jr, Manolidis S, Simaan N. Inroads toward robot-assisted cochlear implant surgery using steerable electrode arrays. Otol. Neurotol.31(8), 1199–1206 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klenzner T, Ngan CC, Knapp FB et al. New strategies for high precision surgery of the temporal bone using a robotic approach for cochlear implantation. Eur. Arch. Otorhinolaryngol.266(7), 955–960 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schurzig D, Webster RJ 3rd, Dietrich MS, Labadie RF. Force of cochlear implant electrode insertion performed by a robotic insertion tool: comparison of traditional versus Advance Off-Stylet techniques. Otol. Neurotol.31(8), 1207–1210 (2010).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson BS, Dorman MF. Cochlear implants: current designs and future possibilities. J. Rehabil. Res. Dev.45(5), 695–730 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar