These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

156 related items for PubMed ID: 10733186

  • 1. A silastic positioner for a modiolus-hugging position of intracochlear electrodes: electrophysiologic effects.
    Cords SM, Reuter G, Issing PR, Sommer A, Kuzma J, Lenarz T.
    Am J Otol; 2000 Mar; 21(2):212-7. PubMed ID: 10733186
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Electrically evoked auditory brain stem responses for lateral and medial placement of the Clarion HiFocus electrode.
    Firszt JB, Wackym PA, Gaggl W, Burg LS, Reeder RM.
    Ear Hear; 2003 Apr; 24(2):184-90. PubMed ID: 12677114
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Electrically evoked compound action potential amplitude growth functions and HiResolution programming levels in pediatric CII implant subjects.
    Eisen MD, Franck KH.
    Ear Hear; 2004 Dec; 25(6):528-38. PubMed ID: 15604914
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Chronic electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve at high stimulus rates: a physiological and histopathological study.
    Xu J, Shepherd RK, Millard RE, Clark GM.
    Hear Res; 1997 Mar; 105(1-2):1-29. PubMed ID: 9083801
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve: the effect of electrode position on neural excitation.
    Shepherd RK, Hatsushika S, Clark GM.
    Hear Res; 1993 Mar; 66(1):108-20. PubMed ID: 8473242
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Identifying cochlear implant channels with poor electrode-neuron interfaces: electrically evoked auditory brain stem responses measured with the partial tripolar configuration.
    Bierer JA, Faulkner KF, Tremblay KL.
    Ear Hear; 2011 Dec; 32(4):436-44. PubMed ID: 21178633
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Extracochlear Stimulation of Electrically Evoked Auditory Brainstem Responses (eABRs) Remains the Preferred Pre-implant Auditory Nerve Function Test in an Assessor-blinded Comparison.
    Causon A, O'Driscoll M, Stapleton E, Lloyd S, Freeman S, Munro KJ.
    Otol Neurotol; 2019 Jan; 40(1):47-55. PubMed ID: 30489452
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. The nucleus contour electrode array: an electrophysiological study.
    Pasanisi E, Vincenti V, Bacciu A, Guida M, Bacciu S.
    Laryngoscope; 2002 Sep; 112(9):1653-6. PubMed ID: 12352681
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. The Clarion electrode positioner: temporal bone studies.
    Fayad JN, Luxford W, Linthicum FH.
    Am J Otol; 2000 Mar; 21(2):226-9. PubMed ID: 10733188
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. New Clarion electrode with positioner: insertion studies.
    Lenarz T, Kuzma J, Weber BP, Reuter G, Neuburger J, Battmer RD, Goldring JE.
    Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl; 2000 Dec; 185():16-8. PubMed ID: 11140987
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Comparison of half-band and full-band electrodes for intracochlear electrical stimulation.
    Xu SA, McAnally KI, Xu J, Clark GM.
    Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol; 1993 May; 102(5):363-7. PubMed ID: 8489166
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Cochlear nerve stimulation with a 3-dimensional penetrating electrode array.
    Hillman T, Badi AN, Normann RA, Kertesz T, Shelton C.
    Otol Neurotol; 2003 Sep; 24(5):764-8. PubMed ID: 14501454
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Effects of the Clarion Electrode Positioning System on auditory thresholds and comfortable loudness levels in pediatric patients with cochlear implants.
    Donaldson GS, Peters MD, Ellis MR, Friedman BJ, Levine SC, Rimell FL.
    Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg; 2001 Aug; 127(8):956-60. PubMed ID: 11493205
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Toward a battery of behavioral and objective measures to achieve optimal cochlear implant stimulation levels in children.
    Gordon KA, Papsin BC, Harrison RV.
    Ear Hear; 2004 Oct; 25(5):447-63. PubMed ID: 15599192
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 8.