Short- Versus Long-Term Hearing Preservation and Speech Recognition Outcomes in Precurved and Straight Electrode Arrays.

IF 1.6 Q2 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
OTO Open Pub Date : 2026-05-20 eCollection Date: 2026-04-01 DOI:10.1002/oto2.70254
Lily V Den Hartog, Andrew W Liu, Divya A Chari
{"title":"Short- Versus Long-Term Hearing Preservation and Speech Recognition Outcomes in Precurved and Straight Electrode Arrays.","authors":"Lily V Den Hartog, Andrew W Liu, Divya A Chari","doi":"10.1002/oto2.70254","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Compare audiologic outcomes between precurved and straight electrode arrays in cochlear implant (CI) recipients while controlling for age and preoperative hearing in a large cohort.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective chart review.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Tertiary referral center.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Adult CI recipients who underwent surgery from 2018 to 2025 with Cochlear Americas slim modiolar CI532/632 (precurved) or slim straight CI522/622 (straight) electrode arrays were included. Preimplantation and postimplantation low-frequency pure tone average (LFPTA) in the short- (1- and 6-months) and long-term (≥12 months) and speech recognition testing (CNC, AzBio in quiet) at 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12-months postactivation were recorded. Hearing preservation (LFPTA shift) and speech recognition scores were evaluated using multivariate linear regression analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred seventy-two patients (190 ears) were included. 124 (65.3%) and 66 (34.7%) ears were implanted with a precurved or straight electrode, respectively. 47 (24.7%) ears had residual hearing (LFPTA ≤ 80) preoperatively. Precurved electrode recipients had significantly better hearing preservation compared to straight electrode recipients in the short-term (<i>F</i> = 4.016, <i>P</i> = .039), though this advantage diminished in long-term follow-up after controlling for age, sex, and preoperative LFPTA. CNC and AzBio scores were not significantly different between electrode arrays at any timepoint postimplantation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Precurved electrodes were associated with small but statistically significant greater hearing preservation in the short-term compared to straight electrodes, but this difference did not persist in the long-term. Speech recognition outcomes were similar for precurved and straight electrodes at all timepoints. These findings should be considered during preoperative decision-making for potential CI recipients.</p>","PeriodicalId":19697,"journal":{"name":"OTO Open","volume":"10 2","pages":"e70254"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13240321/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"OTO Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/oto2.70254","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Compare audiologic outcomes between precurved and straight electrode arrays in cochlear implant (CI) recipients while controlling for age and preoperative hearing in a large cohort.

Study design: Retrospective chart review.

Setting: Tertiary referral center.

Methods: Adult CI recipients who underwent surgery from 2018 to 2025 with Cochlear Americas slim modiolar CI532/632 (precurved) or slim straight CI522/622 (straight) electrode arrays were included. Preimplantation and postimplantation low-frequency pure tone average (LFPTA) in the short- (1- and 6-months) and long-term (≥12 months) and speech recognition testing (CNC, AzBio in quiet) at 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12-months postactivation were recorded. Hearing preservation (LFPTA shift) and speech recognition scores were evaluated using multivariate linear regression analysis.

Results: One hundred seventy-two patients (190 ears) were included. 124 (65.3%) and 66 (34.7%) ears were implanted with a precurved or straight electrode, respectively. 47 (24.7%) ears had residual hearing (LFPTA ≤ 80) preoperatively. Precurved electrode recipients had significantly better hearing preservation compared to straight electrode recipients in the short-term (F = 4.016, P = .039), though this advantage diminished in long-term follow-up after controlling for age, sex, and preoperative LFPTA. CNC and AzBio scores were not significantly different between electrode arrays at any timepoint postimplantation.

Conclusion: Precurved electrodes were associated with small but statistically significant greater hearing preservation in the short-term compared to straight electrodes, but this difference did not persist in the long-term. Speech recognition outcomes were similar for precurved and straight electrodes at all timepoints. These findings should be considered during preoperative decision-making for potential CI recipients.

预弯曲电极阵列和直电极阵列的短期与长期听力保护和语音识别效果。
目的:比较大队列人工耳蜗(CI)受者在控制年龄和术前听力的情况下,预弯曲电极阵列和直电极阵列的听力学结果。研究设计:回顾性图表回顾。单位:三级转诊中心。方法:纳入2018年至2025年期间使用Cochlear Americas细长模形CI532/632(预弯曲)或细长直形CI522/622(直)电极阵列接受手术的成人CI受术者。记录植入前和植入后短期(1和6个月)和长期(≥12个月)的低频纯音平均值(LFPTA)以及激活后1、3、6和12个月的语音识别测试(CNC, AzBio安静)。使用多元线性回归分析评估听力保护(LFPTA移位)和语音识别评分。结果:纳入172例患者(190耳)。预弯电极和直电极分别植入124(65.3%)和66(34.7%)耳。术前残存听力47耳(24.7%)(LFPTA≤80)。预弯曲电极受者短期内的听力保护效果明显优于直电极受者(F = 4.016, P =。039),但在控制年龄、性别和术前LFPTA后的长期随访中,这一优势减弱。在植入后的任何时间点,不同电极阵列的CNC和AzBio评分均无显著差异。结论:与直电极相比,预弯曲电极在短期内具有较小但有统计学意义的更大的听力保护,但这种差异并不持续到长期。在所有时间点,预弯曲电极和直电极的语音识别结果相似。在术前对潜在的CI受者进行决策时应考虑这些发现。
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
OTO Open
OTO Open Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
115
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书