This Article  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

W. PAUL BIGGERS, MD
Chapel Hill, NC

Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1987;113(3):247.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

Ian M. Windmill, PhD, Louisville, at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery Foundation Inc in San Antonio, Tex, presented a detailed comparison of two multichannel cochlear implant systems employed at the University of Louisville. The devices compared were the Symbion four-channel device and the Nucleus 22-channel device. Dr Windmill and colleagues (Serge A. Martinez, MD, Michael B. Nolph, MD, and Barbara Eisenmenger, MS) pointed out that these systems differ in a number of important ways including engineering design, electrode count, surgical management, cosmetic appearance, and protocols. These major differences made direct comparison of the devices difficult, but the authors did an admirable job, with a very detailed analysis of postoperative results.

It was pointed out that the receptive and perceptive results of studies on cochlear implants are not the only considerations when comparing the quality and efficacy of a cochlear implant system. Preimplant procedures, . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?