BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

381 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19713692)

  • 21. Cochlear implants for adults obtaining marginal benefit from acoustic amplification: a European study.
    Fraysse B; Dillier N; Klenzner T; Laszig R; Manrique M; Morera Perez C; Morgon AH; Müller-Deile J; Ramos Macias A
    Am J Otol; 1998 Sep; 19(5):591-7. PubMed ID: 9752966
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Hybrid cochlear implantation: clinical results and critical review in 13 cases.
    Luetje CM; Thedinger BS; Buckler LR; Dawson KL; Lisbona KL
    Otol Neurotol; 2007 Jun; 28(4):473-8. PubMed ID: 17529849
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Central effects of residual hearing: implications for choice of ear for cochlear implantation.
    Francis HW; Yeagle JD; Brightwell T; Venick H
    Laryngoscope; 2004 Oct; 114(10):1747-52. PubMed ID: 15454765
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Cochlear implantation in the octogenarian and nonagenarian.
    Carlson ML; Breen JT; Gifford RH; Driscoll CL; Neff BA; Beatty CW; Peterson AM; Olund AP
    Otol Neurotol; 2010 Oct; 31(8):1343-9. PubMed ID: 20729782
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Performance of older adult cochlear implant users in Hong Kong.
    Chan V; Tong M; Yue V; Wong T; Leung E; Yuen K; van Hasselt A
    Ear Hear; 2007 Apr; 28(2 Suppl):52S-55S. PubMed ID: 17496647
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Beneficial auditory and cognitive effects of auditory brainstem implantation in children.
    Colletti L
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2007 Sep; 127(9):943-6. PubMed ID: 17712673
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Otologics fully implantable hearing system: Phase I trial 1-year results.
    Jenkins HA; Atkins JS; Horlbeck D; Hoffer ME; Balough B; Alexiades G; Garvis W
    Otol Neurotol; 2008 Jun; 29(4):534-41. PubMed ID: 18317397
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Cochlear implant surgery in patients more than seventy-nine years old.
    Eshraghi AA; Rodriguez M; Balkany TJ; Telischi FF; Angeli S; Hodges AV; Adil E
    Laryngoscope; 2009 Jun; 119(6):1180-3. PubMed ID: 19301411
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Speech perception results for children with implants with different levels of preoperative residual hearing.
    Cowan RS; DelDot J; Barker EJ; Sarant JZ; Pegg P; Dettman S; Galvin KL; Rance G; Hollow R; Dowell RC; Pyman B; Gibson WP; Clark GM
    Am J Otol; 1997 Nov; 18(6 Suppl):S125-6. PubMed ID: 9391629
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Long-term assessment after implantation of the Vibrant Soundbridge device.
    Schmuziger N; Schimmann F; àWengen D; Patscheke J; Probst R
    Otol Neurotol; 2006 Feb; 27(2):183-8. PubMed ID: 16436987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Value of the promontory stimulation test in predicting speech perception after cochlear implantation.
    Lee JC; Yoo MH; Ahn JH; Lee KS
    Laryngoscope; 2007 Nov; 117(11):1988-92. PubMed ID: 17767084
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Revision cochlear implant surgery in children: the Johns Hopkins experience.
    Marlowe AL; Chinnici JE; Rivas A; Niparko JK; Francis HW
    Otol Neurotol; 2010 Jan; 31(1):74-82. PubMed ID: 19887981
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. [Evaluation of hearing performance in cochlear implant patients].
    Yücel EA; Erdil A; Keleş N; Solmaz MA; Değer K
    Kulak Burun Bogaz Ihtis Derg; 2002; 9(5):342-5. PubMed ID: 12471280
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. [Vibrant Sound Bridge System. A new kind hearing prosthesis for patients with sensorineural hearing loss. 2. Audiological results].
    Lenarz T; Weber BP; Issing PR; Gnadeberg D; Ambjørnsen K; Mack KF; Winter M
    Laryngorhinootologie; 2001 Jul; 80(7):370-80. PubMed ID: 11488147
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Health-related quality of life of Austrian children and adolescents with cochlear implants.
    Huber M
    Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2005 Aug; 69(8):1089-101. PubMed ID: 15946746
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Cochlear implantation in patients with neurofibromatosis type 2: variables affecting auditory performance.
    Carlson ML; Breen JT; Driscoll CL; Link MJ; Neff BA; Gifford RH; Beatty CW
    Otol Neurotol; 2012 Jul; 33(5):853-62. PubMed ID: 22664900
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. [Cochlear implant for non-deaf patients?].
    Müller-Deile J; Rudert H; Brademann G; Frese K
    Laryngorhinootologie; 1998 Mar; 77(3):136-43. PubMed ID: 9577819
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. The effect of cochlear implantation on music perception by adults with usable pre-operative acoustic hearing.
    Looi V; McDermott H; McKay C; Hickson L
    Int J Audiol; 2008 May; 47(5):257-68. PubMed ID: 18465410
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Audiological application criteria for implantable hearing aid devices: a clinical experience at the Nijmegen ORL clinic.
    Verhaegen VJ; Mylanus EA; Cremers CW; Snik AF
    Laryngoscope; 2008 Sep; 118(9):1645-9. PubMed ID: 18677283
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. From hearing screening to cochlear implantation: cochlear implants in children under 3 years of age.
    Profant M; Kabátová Z; Simková L
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2008 Apr; 128(4):369-72. PubMed ID: 18368567
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 20.