315 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31352808)
1. [The distance from the modiolus of perimodiolar electrode arrays of cochlear implants.
Perényi Á; Nagy R; Dimák B; Csanády M; Jóri J; Kiss JG; Rovó L
Orv Hetil; 2019 Aug; 160(31):1216-1222. PubMed ID: 31352808
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. [Detection of “tip fold-over” of the cochlear implant electrode array with transimpedance matrix (TIM) measurement].
Nagy R; Perényi Á; Dimák B; Csanády M; Kiss J; Rovó L
Orv Hetil; 2021 Jun; 162(25):988-996. PubMed ID: 34148026
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison of Perimodiolar Electrodes: Imaging and Electrophysiological Outcomes.
Mewes A; Brademann G; Hey M
Otol Neurotol; 2020 Aug; 41(7):e934-e944. PubMed ID: 32658111
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Importance of Perimodiolar Electrode Position for Psychoacoustic Discrimination in Cochlear Implantation.
Ramos Macias A; Perez Zaballos MT; Ramos de Miguel A; Cervera Paz J
Otol Neurotol; 2017 Dec; 38(10):e429-e437. PubMed ID: 29135866
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. [Possibilities for residual hearing preservation with Nucleus CI532 Slim Modiolar electrode array. Case report].
Nagy R; Jarabin JA; Dimák B; Perényi Á; Tóth F; Szűts V; Jóri J; Kiss JG; Rovó L
Orv Hetil; 2018 Oct; 159(41):1680-1688. PubMed ID: 30295044
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [A novel intraoperative imaging tool to follow the cochlear implant electrode array insertion dynamics].
Perényi Á; Nagy R; Horváth B; Posta B; Dimák B; Csanády M; Kiss JG; Rovó L
Orv Hetil; 2021 May; 162(22):878-883. PubMed ID: 34052802
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Cochlear's unique electrode portfolio now and in the future.
von Wallenberg E; Briggs R
Cochlear Implants Int; 2014 May; 15 Suppl 1():S59-61. PubMed ID: 24869446
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Electrophysiological detection of scalar changing perimodiolar cochlear electrode arrays: a long term follow-up study.
Mittmann P; Todt I; Ernst A; Rademacher G; Mutze S; Göricke S; Schlamann M; Ramalingam R; Lang S; Christov F; Arweiler-Harbeck D
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol; 2016 Dec; 273(12):4251-4256. PubMed ID: 27351885
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The Pull-Back Technique for the 532 Slim Modiolar Electrode.
Riemann C; Sudhoff H; Todt I
Biomed Res Int; 2019; 2019():6917084. PubMed ID: 31240221
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Modiolar proximity of three perimodiolar cochlear implant electrodes.
Balkany TJ; Eshraghi AA; Yang N
Acta Otolaryngol; 2002 Jun; 122(4):363-9. PubMed ID: 12125990
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Relationship Between Electrode-to-Modiolus Distance and Current Levels for Adults With Cochlear Implants.
Davis TJ; Zhang D; Gifford RH; Dawant BM; Labadie RF; Noble JH
Otol Neurotol; 2016 Jan; 37(1):31-7. PubMed ID: 26649603
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Cochleostomy and facial recess packing alter cochlear implant electrode location in a human cochlea model.
Dedmon MM; O'Connell BP; Yawn RJ; Rivas A
Am J Otolaryngol; 2018; 39(5):489-492. PubMed ID: 29805061
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The Effect of Electrode Position on Behavioral and Electrophysiologic Measurements in Perimodiolar Cochlear Implants.
Collins A; Foghsgaard S; Druce E; Margani V; Mejia O; O'Leary S
Otol Neurotol; 2024 Mar; 45(3):238-244. PubMed ID: 38238914
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The influence of cochlear morphology on the final electrode array position.
Ketterer MC; Aschendorff A; Arndt S; Hassepass F; Wesarg T; Laszig R; Beck R
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol; 2018 Feb; 275(2):385-394. PubMed ID: 29242990
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Effect of Electrode to Modiolus Distance on Electrophysiological and Psychophysical Parameters in CI Patients With Perimodiolar and Lateral Electrode Arrays.
Degen CV; Büchner A; Kludt E; Lenarz T
Otol Neurotol; 2020 Oct; 41(9):e1091-e1097. PubMed ID: 32925843
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Imaging evaluation of electrode placement and effect on electrode discrimination on different cochlear implant electrode arrays.
Ramos de Miguel Á; Argudo AA; Borkoski Barreiro SA; Falcón González JC; Ramos Macías A
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol; 2018 Jun; 275(6):1385-1394. PubMed ID: 29610960
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Acoustic to electric pitch comparisons in cochlear implant subjects with residual hearing.
Boëx C; Baud L; Cosendai G; Sigrist A; Kós MI; Pelizzone M
J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2006 Jun; 7(2):110-24. PubMed ID: 16450213
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Electrophysiologic channel interaction, electrode pitch ranking, and behavioral threshold in straight versus perimodiolar cochlear implant electrode arrays.
Hughes ML; Abbas PJ
J Acoust Soc Am; 2006 Mar; 119(3):1538-47. PubMed ID: 16583899
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Scalar localization by cone-beam computed tomography of cochlear implant carriers: a comparative study between straight and periomodiolar precurved electrode arrays.
Boyer E; Karkas A; Attye A; Lefournier V; Escude B; Schmerber S
Otol Neurotol; 2015 Mar; 36(3):422-9. PubMed ID: 25575374
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The Effect of Round Window vs Cochleostomy Surgical Approaches on Cochlear Implant Electrode Position: A Flat-Panel Computed Tomography Study.
Jiam NT; Jiradejvong P; Pearl MS; Limb CJ
JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg; 2016 Sep; 142(9):873-80. PubMed ID: 27355198
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
