382 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14501454)
21. Design and fabrication of multichannel cochlear implants for animal research.
Rebscher SJ; Hetherington AM; Snyder RL; Leake PA; Bonham BH
J Neurosci Methods; 2007 Oct; 166(1):1-12. PubMed ID: 17727956
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Comparison of electrically evoked whole-nerve action potential and electrically evoked auditory brainstem response thresholds in nucleus CI24R cochlear implant recipients.
Hay-McCutcheon MJ; Brown CJ; Clay KS; Seyle K
J Am Acad Audiol; 2002 Sep; 13(8):416-27. PubMed ID: 12371659
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Effect of cochlear implant electrode array design on auditory nerve and behavioral response in children.
Telmesani LM; Said NM
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2015 May; 79(5):660-5. PubMed ID: 25746517
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Selective activation of cat primary auditory cortex by way of direct intraneural auditory nerve stimulation.
Kim SJ; Badi AN; Normann RA
Laryngoscope; 2007 Jun; 117(6):1053-62. PubMed ID: 17545868
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Electrically evoked auditory brainstem responses in adults and children: effects of lateral to medial placement of the nucleus 24 contour electrode array.
Runge-Samuelson C; Firszt JB; Gaggl W; Wackym PA
Otol Neurotol; 2009 Jun; 30(4):464-70. PubMed ID: 19300297
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Electrode independence in intraneural cochlear nerve stimulation.
Badi AN; Owa AO; Shelton C; Normann RA
Otol Neurotol; 2007 Jan; 28(1):16-24. PubMed ID: 17195741
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Characteristics of electrically evoked auditory brainstem responses in patients with cochlear nerve canal stenosis receiving cochlear implants.
Wang Z; Liu Y; Wang L; Shen X; Han S; Wang W; Gao F; Liang W; Peng KA
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2018 Jan; 104():98-103. PubMed ID: 29287891
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. 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]
29. Stimulation of the facial nerve by intracochlear electrodes in otosclerosis: a computer modeling study.
Frijns JH; Kalkman RK; Briaire JJ
Otol Neurotol; 2009 Dec; 30(8):1168-74. PubMed ID: 19574948
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Electrophysiologic effects of placing cochlear implant electrodes in a perimodiolar position in young children.
Wackym PA; Firszt JB; Gaggl W; Runge-Samuelson CL; Reeder RM; Raulie JC
Laryngoscope; 2004 Jan; 114(1):71-6. PubMed ID: 14709998
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Auditory brainstem activity and development evoked by apical versus basal cochlear implant electrode stimulation in children.
Gordon KA; Papsin BC; Harrison RV
Clin Neurophysiol; 2007 Aug; 118(8):1671-84. PubMed ID: 17588811
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Performance of multisite silicon microprobes implanted chronically in the ventral cochlear nucleus of the cat.
McCreery D; Lossinsky A; Pikov V
IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 2007 Jun; 54(6 Pt 1):1042-52. PubMed ID: 17554823
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Multiple-channel stimulation of the cochlear nucleus.
Evans DE; Niparko JK; Miller JM; Jyung RW; Anderson DJ
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg; 1989 Dec; 101(6):651-7. PubMed ID: 2512553
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Packing of the cochleostomy site affects auditory nerve response thresholds in precurved off-stylet cochlear implants.
Gordin A; Papsin B; Gordon K
Otol Neurotol; 2010 Feb; 31(2):204-9. PubMed ID: 20101160
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Impedance Changes and Fibrous Tissue Growth after Cochlear Implantation Are Correlated and Can Be Reduced Using a Dexamethasone Eluting Electrode.
Wilk M; Hessler R; Mugridge K; Jolly C; Fehr M; Lenarz T; Scheper V
PLoS One; 2016; 11(2):e0147552. PubMed ID: 26840740
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. 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]
37. 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]
38. Development of an electrode for the artificial cochlear sensory epithelium.
Tona Y; Inaoka T; Ito J; Kawano S; Nakagawa T
Hear Res; 2015 Dec; 330(Pt A):106-12. PubMed ID: 26299844
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Behavioral and electrophysiological responses to electrical stimulation in the cat. I. Absolute thresholds.
Smith DW; Finley CC; van den Honert C; Olszyk VB; Konrad KE
Hear Res; 1994 Dec; 81(1-2):1-10. PubMed ID: 7737916
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Fabrication and evaluation of an improved polymer-based cochlear electrode array for atraumatic insertion.
Gwon TM; Min KS; Kim JH; Oh SH; Lee HS; Park MH; Kim SJ
Biomed Microdevices; 2015 Apr; 17(2):32. PubMed ID: 25681972
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
