Effect of Cochlear Implant Electrode Insertion Depth on Speech Perception Outcomes: A Systematic Review

Tabita M. Breitsprecher, Wolf-Dieter Baumgartner, Kevin Brown, Stefan Dazert, Úna Doyle, A. Dhanasingh, W. Grossmann, R. Hagen, P. Van de Heyning, Robert Mlynski, M. Neudert, Gunesh Rajan, K. Rak, V. van Rompaey, J. Schmutzhard, S. Volkenstein, Christiane Völter, Wilhelm Wimmer, M. Zernotti, N. Weiss
{"title":"Effect of Cochlear Implant Electrode Insertion Depth on Speech Perception Outcomes: A Systematic Review","authors":"Tabita M. Breitsprecher, Wolf-Dieter Baumgartner, Kevin Brown, Stefan Dazert, Úna Doyle, A. Dhanasingh, W. Grossmann, R. Hagen, P. Van de Heyning, Robert Mlynski, M. Neudert, Gunesh Rajan, K. Rak, V. van Rompaey, J. Schmutzhard, S. Volkenstein, Christiane Völter, Wilhelm Wimmer, M. Zernotti, N. Weiss","doi":"10.1097/ono.0000000000000045","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n The suitable electrode array choice is broadly discussed in cochlear implantation surgery. Whether to use a shorter electrode length under the aim of structure preservation versus choosing a longer array to achieve a greater cochlear coverage is a matter of debate. The aim of this review is to identify the impact of the insertion depth of a cochlear implant (CI) electrode array on CI users’ speech perception outcomes.\n \n \n \n PubMed was searched for English-language articles that were published in a peer-reviewed journal from 1997 to 2022.\n \n \n \n A systematic electronic search of the literature was carried out using PubMed to find relevant literature on the impact of insertion depth on speech perception. The review was conducted according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines of reporting. Studies in both, children and adults with pre- or postlingual hearing loss, implanted with a CI were included in this study. Articles written in languages other than English, literature reviews, meta-analyses, animal studies, histopathological studies, or studies pertaining exclusively to imaging modalities without reporting correlations between insertion depth and speech outcomes were excluded. The risk of bias was determined using the “Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions” tool. Articles were extracted by 2 authors independently using predefined search terms. The titles and abstracts were screened manually to identify studies that potentially meet the inclusion criteria. The extracted information included: the study population, type of hearing loss, outcomes reported, devices used, speech perception outcomes, insertion depth (linear insertion depth and/or the angular insertion depth), and correlation between insertion depth and the speech perception outcomes.\n \n \n \n A total of 215 relevant studies were assessed for eligibility. Twenty-three studies met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed further. Seven studies found no significant correlation between insertion depth and speech perception outcomes. Fifteen found either a significant positive correlation or a positive effect between insertion depth and speech perception. Only 1 study found a significant negative correlation between insertion depth and speech perception outcomes.\n \n \n \n Although most studies reported a positive effect of insertion depth on speech perception outcomes, one-third of the identified studies reported no correlation. Thus, the insertion depth must be considered as a contributing factor to speech perception rather than as a major decisive criterion.\n \n \n \n This review has been registered in PROSPERO, the international prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42021257547), available at https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/.\n","PeriodicalId":124165,"journal":{"name":"Otology & Neurotology Open","volume":"529 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Otology & Neurotology Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ono.0000000000000045","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The suitable electrode array choice is broadly discussed in cochlear implantation surgery. Whether to use a shorter electrode length under the aim of structure preservation versus choosing a longer array to achieve a greater cochlear coverage is a matter of debate. The aim of this review is to identify the impact of the insertion depth of a cochlear implant (CI) electrode array on CI users’ speech perception outcomes. PubMed was searched for English-language articles that were published in a peer-reviewed journal from 1997 to 2022. A systematic electronic search of the literature was carried out using PubMed to find relevant literature on the impact of insertion depth on speech perception. The review was conducted according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines of reporting. Studies in both, children and adults with pre- or postlingual hearing loss, implanted with a CI were included in this study. Articles written in languages other than English, literature reviews, meta-analyses, animal studies, histopathological studies, or studies pertaining exclusively to imaging modalities without reporting correlations between insertion depth and speech outcomes were excluded. The risk of bias was determined using the “Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions” tool. Articles were extracted by 2 authors independently using predefined search terms. The titles and abstracts were screened manually to identify studies that potentially meet the inclusion criteria. The extracted information included: the study population, type of hearing loss, outcomes reported, devices used, speech perception outcomes, insertion depth (linear insertion depth and/or the angular insertion depth), and correlation between insertion depth and the speech perception outcomes. A total of 215 relevant studies were assessed for eligibility. Twenty-three studies met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed further. Seven studies found no significant correlation between insertion depth and speech perception outcomes. Fifteen found either a significant positive correlation or a positive effect between insertion depth and speech perception. Only 1 study found a significant negative correlation between insertion depth and speech perception outcomes. Although most studies reported a positive effect of insertion depth on speech perception outcomes, one-third of the identified studies reported no correlation. Thus, the insertion depth must be considered as a contributing factor to speech perception rather than as a major decisive criterion. This review has been registered in PROSPERO, the international prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42021257547), available at https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/.
人工耳蜗电极植入深度对语音感知结果的影响:系统回顾
在人工耳蜗植入手术中,如何选择合适的电极阵列是一个广泛讨论的问题。在保留结构的前提下使用较短的电极长度,还是选择较长的电极阵列以实现更大的耳蜗覆盖范围,这是一个争论不休的问题。本综述旨在确定人工耳蜗电极阵列的插入深度对人工耳蜗使用者言语感知效果的影响。 我们在 PubMed 上搜索了 1997 年至 2022 年间发表在同行评审期刊上的英文文章。 我们使用 PubMed 对文献进行了系统的电子检索,以查找有关插入深度对言语感知影响的相关文献。综述按照系统综述和荟萃分析报告指南的首选报告项目进行。本研究同时纳入了关于儿童和成人舌前或舌后听力损失、植入 CI 的研究。以英语以外的语言撰写的文章、文献综述、荟萃分析、动物研究、组织病理学研究,或只涉及成像模式而未报告植入深度与言语效果之间相关性的研究均被排除在外。使用 "干预措施非随机研究的偏倚风险 "工具确定偏倚风险。文章由两位作者使用预定义的检索词独立提取。人工筛选标题和摘要,以确定可能符合纳入标准的研究。提取的信息包括:研究人群、听力损失类型、报告结果、使用的设备、言语感知结果、插入深度(线性插入深度和/或角度插入深度)以及插入深度与言语感知结果之间的相关性。 共对 215 项相关研究进行了资格评估。有 23 项研究符合纳入标准,并进行了进一步分析。七项研究发现插入深度与言语感知结果之间没有明显的相关性。15 项研究发现插入深度与言语感知之间存在明显的正相关或正效应。只有一项研究发现插入深度与言语感知结果之间存在明显的负相关。 虽然大多数研究报告了插入深度对言语感知结果的积极影响,但三分之一的已确定研究报告称两者之间没有相关性。因此,插入深度必须被视为影响言语感知的一个因素,而不是主要的决定性标准。 本综述已在国际前瞻性系统综述注册中心 PROSPERO 注册(CRD42021257547),网址为 https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信