Delayed cochlear implantation after surgical labyrinthectomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cochlear implantation has been used to rehabilitate profoundly deafened adults for more than 25 years. However, surgical labyrinthectomy is often considered a contraindication to cochlear implantation, especially if there is a significant delay between the two procedures. As the role of cochlear implantation continues to expand, this idea requires reconsideration. CASE REPORT: A 59-year-old woman presented to our clinic after undergoing bilateral surgical labyrinthectomies for intractable Ménière's disease 21 years prior. Despite the significant time delay, she underwent cochlear implantation with a good audiological outcome and improved quality of life. CONCLUSION: Changes to the cochlea and vestibule following surgical labyrinthectomy include cochlear ossification and obliteration of the vestibule. These issues have been thought to limit the potential for cochlear implantation, especially when there is a significant delay between the two procedures. However, delayed cochlear implantation, even decades after labyrinthectomy, remains a viable treatment option which can benefit selected patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".