• Home
  • Practice Focus
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
    • How I Do It
    • TRIO Best Practices
  • Business of Medicine
    • Health Policy
    • Legal Matters
    • Practice Management
    • Technology
    • AI
  • Literature Reviews
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
  • Career
    • Medical Education
    • Professional Development
    • Resident Focus
  • ENT Perspectives
    • ENT Expressions
    • Everyday Ethics
    • From TRIO
    • The Great Debate
    • Letter From the Editor
    • Rx: Wellness
    • The Voice
    • Viewpoint
    • SUO Corner
  • TRIO Resources
    • Triological Society
    • The Laryngoscope
    • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
    • TRIO Combined Sections Meetings
    • COSM
    • Related Otolaryngology Events
  • Search

Cochlear Implants: Changing Indications and New Technology

by Nikki Kean • November 9, 2017

  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
Print-Friendly Version

The most dramatic change in technology has been the shrinking of implantable stimulators. Compared with the original implants, the new stimulators are approximately 50% of their thickness or less, Dr. Buchman noted. This has enabled surgeons to create reliable implant fixation while avoiding the need for a bony seat or recess for the device in most instances. Now, the devices can slide under the temporal periosteum or muscle alone. “They don’t stick up as much [from the skull] and there are fewer skin reactions related to the site,” Dr. Buchman said.

You Might Also Like

  • Changing Indications and New Technologies for Cochlear Implants
  • Audiologists Miss Many Candidates for Cochlear Implants
  • Issues Surrounding Cochlear Implants for Certain Patients with Hearing Loss
  • Double Benefit? The case for bilateral cochlear implants
Explore This Issue
November 2017

All three stimulators, Dr. Lalwani said, look very similar and contain sophisticated electronics that are designed not to fail. “The expectation is that the CI will last a lifetime,” he added. Dr. Buchman agreed: “The new implants have become much more reliable, both the internal and external devices, which is really good news.”

In addition to the thickness of the implant, there have been advances in the design of the electrodes that run from the stimulator into the cochlea. “There is evidence that the outcome after cochlear implant is not as good when there is trauma to the cochlea compared to atraumatic procedures [Ear Hear. 2013;34:413-425]. The electrodes that attach to the cochlea implant have also gotten much smaller, thereby reducing the risk of damaging the fragile structures inside the cochlea,” Dr. Lalwani said.

Today’s external processors are like mini-laptop computers. There are a number of pre-processing strategies taken from hearing aid technology that improve performance. One example is the use of dual or directional microphones, Dr. Buchman said, “which has been very helpful in improving hearing in noise.” Fortunately, many of the older speech processors for implants can have their operating systems upgraded by the manufacturers, Dr. Buchman added.

In addition, manufacturers are working on improving battery life. Pre-curved electrodes that hug the cochlear modiolus have the potential to extend battery life between charges. “If the electrode is placed closer to the nerve endings, the amount of energy required to stimulate the nerve is less. The theoretical advantage is that with less energy required for nerve stimulation, more precise stimulation with less interaction in channels that are adjacent to each other is possible,” Dr. Lalwani said.

Wearing options have also improved patient satisfaction. “Cochlear implants used to be a technological wonder, but it has now become a consumer product in the sense that you have all these choices to make with respect to color, size, shape—all sorts of things,” Dr. Lalwani said. One company makes a waterproof speech processor (Advanced Bionics) that allows users to swim underwater, which is especially important to children, Dr. Lalwani noted. Other companies also have products that protect the external component from water damage.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Single Page

Filed Under: Home Slider, Special Reports Tagged With: clinical best practices, cochlear implants, hearing loss, residual hearing, treatmentsIssue: November 2017

You Might Also Like:

  • Changing Indications and New Technologies for Cochlear Implants
  • Audiologists Miss Many Candidates for Cochlear Implants
  • Issues Surrounding Cochlear Implants for Certain Patients with Hearing Loss
  • Double Benefit? The case for bilateral cochlear implants

The Triological SocietyENTtoday is a publication of The Triological Society.

Polls

Have you ever participated in a professional group's advocacy or Hill Day event?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Polls Archive

Top Articles for Residents

  • Is the SLOR in Otolaryngology Residency Applications Contributing to Rural Disparities?
  • Applications Open for Resident Members of the ENTtoday Editorial Board: Deadline Extended
  • A Resident’s View of AI in Otolaryngology
  • Call for Resident Bowl Questions
  • Resident Pearls: Pediatric Otolaryngologists Share Tips for Safer, Smarter Tonsillectomies
  • Popular this Week
  • Most Popular
  • Most Recent
    • A Royal Family Heritage: The Habsburg Jaw
    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment
    • Some Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Resists PPI Treatment
    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?
    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment
    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment
    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?
    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?
    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment
    • Complications for When Physicians Change a Maiden Name
    • Society Debuts TRIO Leadership Academy
    • Innovations in Otolaryngology: Two Paths to Progress
    • How to Have Effective Presurgical Discussions
    • Advocacy: Finding Our Voice
    • A Royal Family Heritage: The Habsburg Jaw

Follow Us

  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Advertise
  • The Triological Society
  • The Laryngoscope
  • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookies

Wiley

Copyright © 2026 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1559-4939