BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

109 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11892186)

  • 21. [Electrically evoked auditory brainstem responses in patients with absence of cochlear modiolus receiving cochlear implantation].
    Wang ZX; Wang LE; Gong SS; Han SG; Gao FQ
    Lin Chuang Er Bi Yan Hou Tou Jing Wai Ke Za Zhi; 2017 Jan; 31(2):111-115. PubMed ID: 29871199
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Histological and physiological effects of the central auditory prosthesis: surface versus penetrating electrodes.
    Liu X; McPhee G; Seldon HL; Clark GM
    Hear Res; 1997 Dec; 114(1-2):264-74. PubMed ID: 9447940
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Blink reflex and auditory speech perception in prelingually cochlear-implanted children.
    Emamdjomeh H; Shafaghat L; Abbassalipour P; Hassanzadeh S; Alaeddini F; Farhadi M; Daneshi A
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2005 Apr; 125(4):358-62. PubMed ID: 15823805
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. The cochlear prosthesis: a review of the design and evaluation of electrode implants for the profoundly deaf.
    Spelman FA
    Crit Rev Biomed Eng; 1982; 8(3):223-52. PubMed ID: 6754255
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. [Stapedius reflex in cochlear implant].
    Laszig R
    HNO; 1998 Oct; 46(10):884. PubMed ID: 9846271
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Chronic intracochlear electrical stimulation in the neonatally deafened cat. I: Expansion of central representation.
    Snyder RL; Rebscher SJ; Cao KL; Leake PA; Kelly K
    Hear Res; 1990 Dec; 50(1-2):7-33. PubMed ID: 2076984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Evaluation of focused multipolar stimulation for cochlear implants: a preclinical safety study.
    Shepherd RK; Wise AK; Enke YL; Carter PM; Fallon JB
    J Neural Eng; 2017 Aug; 14(4):046020. PubMed ID: 28607224
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Electrical stimulation of the auditory pathway in deaf patients following acoustic neurinoma surgery and initial results with a new auditory brainstem implant system.
    Mueller J; Behr R; Knaus C; Milewski C; Schoen F; Helms J
    Adv Otorhinolaryngol; 2000; 57():229-35. PubMed ID: 11892155
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Electrophysiological findings in two bilateral cochlear implant cases: does the duration of deafness affect electrically evoked auditory brain stem responses?
    Thai-Van H; Gallego S; Truy E; Veuillet E; Collet L
    Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol; 2002 Nov; 111(11):1008-14. PubMed ID: 12450176
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Neural response thresholds in the Nucleus Contour cochlear implant before and after stylet removal.
    Tsuji RK; Goffi-Gomez MV; Peralta CO; Guedes MC; Magalhães AT; Neto RB; Bento RF
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2009 Nov; 129(11):1330-6. PubMed ID: 19863333
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. From nucleus 24 to 513: changing cochlear implant design affects auditory response thresholds.
    Gordon KA; Papsin BC
    Otol Neurotol; 2013 Apr; 34(3):436-42. PubMed ID: 23370566
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. [How does a cochlear implant speech processor work?].
    Adunka O; Kiefer J
    Laryngorhinootologie; 2005 Nov; 84(11):841-50; quiz 851-4. PubMed ID: 16358193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Electrophysiologic evaluation of the cochlear implant patient.
    Stypulkowski PH; van den Honert C; Kvistad SD
    Otolaryngol Clin North Am; 1986 May; 19(2):249-57. PubMed ID: 3754948
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Auditory brainstem activity in children with 9-30 months of bilateral cochlear implant use.
    Gordon KA; Valero J; Papsin BC
    Hear Res; 2007 Nov; 233(1-2):97-107. PubMed ID: 17850999
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. A case study of a 4-year-old perilingual deaf child implanted with an Ineraid multichannel cochlear implant.
    Montandon P; Kasper A; Pelizzone M
    ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec; 1991; 53(5):315-8. PubMed ID: 1795917
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Neurophysiology of cochlear implant users I: effects of stimulus current level and electrode site on the electrical ABR, MLR, and N1-P2 response.
    Firszt JB; Chambers RD; Kraus And N; Reeder RM
    Ear Hear; 2002 Dec; 23(6):502-15. PubMed ID: 12476088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Electrical cochlear stimulation in the deaf cat: comparisons between psychophysical and central auditory neuronal thresholds.
    Beitel RE; Snyder RL; Schreiner CE; Raggio MW; Leake PA
    J Neurophysiol; 2000 Apr; 83(4):2145-62. PubMed ID: 10758124
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. The Vienna cochlear implant program.
    Burian K; Hochmair-Desoyer IJ; Eisenwort B
    Otolaryngol Clin North Am; 1986 May; 19(2):313-28. PubMed ID: 3754952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Medialization of electrode array in cochlear implantation.
    Watts SJ; Lindsey P; Hawthorne M
    J Laryngol Otol; 2000 Oct; 114(10):746-9. PubMed ID: 11127142
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Prediction of behavioral threshold and comfort values for Nucleus 22-channel implant patients from electrical auditory brain stem response test results.
    Shallop JK; VanDyke L; Goin DW; Mischke RE
    Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol; 1991 Nov; 100(11):896-8. PubMed ID: 1746823
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.