Intraoperative findings on ECAP-measurement: Normal or special case?

References

• Abbas P.J., Brown C.J., Shallop J.K., Firszt J.B., Hughes M.L. et al. 1999. Summary of results using the Nucleus CI24M implant to record the electrically evoked compound action potential. Ear Hear, 20, 45–59.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aschendorff A., Klenzner T., Arndt S., Beck R., Schild C. et al. 2011. Insertion results for Contour and Contour Advance electrodes: Are there individual learning curves? HNO, 59, 448–452.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Battmer R.D., Dillier N., Lai W.K., Weber B.P., Brown C. et al. 2004. Evaluation of the neural response telemetry (NRT) capabilities of the Nucleus research platform 8: Initial results from the NRT trial. Int J Audiol, 43(Suppl. 1), 10–15.
   Google Scholar
• Biedron S., Prescher A., Ilgner J. & Westhofen M. 2010. The internal dimensions of the cochlear scalae with special reference to cochlear electrode insertion trauma. Otol Neurotol, 31, 731–737.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Botros A., van Dijk B. & Killian M. 2007. AutoNRT™: An automated system that measures ECAP thresholds with the Nucleus Freedom cochlear implant via machine intelligence. Artif Intell Med, 40, 15–28.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Botros A. & Psarros C. 2010. Neural response telemetry reconsidered: I. The relevance of ECAP threshold profiles and scaled profiled to cochlear implant fitting. Ear Hear, 31, 367–379.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Botros A., Banna R. & Maruthurkkara S. 2013. The next generation of Nucleus fitting: A multiplatform approach towards universal cochlear implant management. Int J Audiol, 52, 485–494.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown C.J., Hughes M.L., Luk B., Abbas P.J., Wolaver A. et al. 2000. The relationship between EAP and EABR thresholds and levels used to program the Nucleus 24 speech processor: Data from adults. Ear Hear, 21, 151–163.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cinar B.C., Atas A., Sennaroglu G. & Sennaroglu L. 2011. Evaluation of objective test techniques in cochlear implant users with inner-ear malformations. Otol Neurotol, 32, 1065–1074.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen L.T., Lenarz T., Battmer R.D., Bender v.S., Busby P.A. et al. 2005. A psychophysical forward masking comparison of longitudinal spread of neural excitation in the Contour and straight Nucleus electrode arrays. Int J Audiol, 44, 559–566.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gartner L., Lenarz T., Joseph G. & Buchner A. 2010. Clinical use of a system for the automated recording and analysis of electrically evoked compound action potentials (ECAPs) in cochlear implant patients. Acta Otolaryngol, 130, 724–732.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guedes M.C., Brito Neto R.V., Goffi Gomez M.V.S., Santanna S.B.G., Peralta C.G. et al. 2005. Neural response telemetry measures in patients implanted with Nucleus 24. Rev Bras Otorrinolaringol, 71, 660–667.
   Google Scholar
• Hatsushika S., Shepherd R.K., Tong Y.C., Clark G.M. & Funasaka S. 1990. Dimensions of the scala tympani in the human and cat with reference to cochlear implants. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol, 99, 871–876.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hughes M.L., Brown C.J., Abbas P.J., Wolaver A.A. & Gervais J.P. 2000. Comparison of EAP thresholds with map levels in the Nucleus 24 cochlear implant. Data from children. Ear Hear, 21, 164–174.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hughes M.L. 2006. Fundamentals of clinical ECAP measures in cochlear implants Part 2: Measurement techniques and tips. Audiology Online (Article 1717. Retrieved January 17, 2013. Direct access URL located at: http://www.audiologyonline.com/articles/fundamentals-clinical-ecap- measures-in-846) 1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Igarashi M., Takahashi M. & Alford BR. 1976. Cross-sectional area of scala tympani in human and cat. Arch Otolaryngol, 102, 428–429.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kubik S. 1987. Hör- und Gleichgewichtsorgan. In: Rauber, Kopsch (eds.). Anatomie des Menschen, Bd. III Nervensystem, Sinnesorgane: 20th edition. New York: Thieme, p. 625.
   Google Scholar
• Lai W.K., Aksit M., Akdas F. & Dillier N. 2004. Longitudinal behaviour of neural response telemetry (NRT) data and clinical implications. Int J Audiol, 43, 252–263.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lai W.K., Dillier N., Weber B.P., Lenarz T., Battmer R.D. et al. 2009. TNRT profiles with the Nucleus research platform 8 system. Int J Audiol, 48, 645–654.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKay C.M., Chandan K., Akhoun I., Siciliano C. & Kluk K. 2013. Can ECAP measures be used for totally objective programming of cochlear implants? J Assoc Res Otolaryngol, 14, 879–890.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller C.A., Brown C.J., Abbas P.J. & Chi S. 2008. The clinical application of potentials evoked from the peripheral auditory system. Hear Res, 242, 184–197.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muahimeed H.A., Al Anazy F., Hamed O. & Shubair E. 2010. Correlation between NRT measurement level and behavioral levels in pediatrics cochlear implant patients. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol, 74, 356–360.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parkinson A.J., Arcaroli J., Staller S.J., Arndt P.L., Cosgriff A. et al. 2002. The Nucleus 24 Contour cochlear implant system: Adult clinical trial results. Ear Hear, 23(1 Suppl.), 41S–48S.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saunders E., Cohen L. Aschendorff A., Shapiro W., Knight M. et al. 2002. Threshold, comfortable level, and impedance changes as a function of electrodemodiolar distance. Ear Hear, 23(1 Suppl.), 28S–40S.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van der Beek F.B., Briaire J.J. & Frijns J.H.M. 2012. Effects of parameter manipulations on spread of excitation measured with electrically-evoked compound action potentials. Int J Audiol, 51, 465–474.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Dijk B., Botros A.M., Battmer R.D., Begall K., Dillier N. et al. 2007. Clinical results of AutoNRT, a completely automatic ECAP recording system for cochlear implants. Ear Hear, 28, 558–570.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Wermeskerken G.K., van Olphen A.F. & Graamans K. 2009. Imaging of electrode position in relation to electrode functioning after cochlear implantation. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol, 266, 1527–1531.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wysocki J. 1999. Dimensions of the human vestibular and tympanic scalae. Hear Res, 135, 39–46.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zwistocki M. 1948. Theorie der Schneckenmechanik. Acta Otolyngol (Stockh.), 72(Suppl.), 1–76.
   Google Scholar