2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2017.08.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The value of intraoperative EABRs in auditory brainstem implantation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

1
10
0
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
1
10
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The results of the study indicated that each E-ABR waveforms should have a stimulus artifact within the first 0.4 m s, and the peaks after 4 m s show the non-auditory stimulation without any stimulation of the auditory pathway. It was recommended to not use the electrodes with non-auditory stimulation while measuring E-ABR during the actual device stimulation [15]. In the intraoperative testing of our case, two peak responses were observed without any non-auditory stimulation in the EABR measurement in E1.…”
mentioning
confidence: 78%
“…The results of the study indicated that each E-ABR waveforms should have a stimulus artifact within the first 0.4 m s, and the peaks after 4 m s show the non-auditory stimulation without any stimulation of the auditory pathway. It was recommended to not use the electrodes with non-auditory stimulation while measuring E-ABR during the actual device stimulation [15]. In the intraoperative testing of our case, two peak responses were observed without any non-auditory stimulation in the EABR measurement in E1.…”
mentioning
confidence: 78%
“…The positioning directly influences the levels of speech recognition and whether there are non-auditory side effects in patients while at the same time there is the risk of brainstem injury [ 6 ]. Orientation by anatomical landmarks and intraoperative measured evoked auditory brainstem responses (EABRs) are considered gold standard navigation for electrode placement [ 7 ]. Anatomical landmarks in proximity to the target structure serve for identification of the CN surface that is not fully visible during surgery; moreover, orientation may be altered due to previous surgeries around the cerbello-pontine angle (CPA).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Anatomical landmarks in proximity to the target structure serve for identification of the CN surface that is not fully visible during surgery; moreover, orientation may be altered due to previous surgeries around the cerbello-pontine angle (CPA). To spot the active auditory context on the CN, EABRs assist in combination with a placement (stimulation) electrode [ 7 ]. In current practice, once detected, the optimal position is memorized by the surgeon and sometimes marked in situ and then targeted with the ABI [ 8 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Auditory brainstem response (ABR), auditory middle latency response (AMLR) and cortical auditory evoked potential (CAEP) are among electrophysiological tests that have been studied in children and adults with auditory dysfunctions Hall [4], Nash Kille & Sharma [8], Skoe & Kraus [1], Yang [9]. For many decades, ABR has been used as a standard electrophysiological test for various clinical applications in the fields of audiology and neuro-otology Anwar et al [10], Hall [1], Koohi [11]. Depending on its specific purposes, ABR is typically recorded with stimuli such as clicks, tone bursts or chirps Birkent et al [12], Cobb & Stuart [13], Hall [4], Prendergast et al [14].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%