Deafness Progressing to Cochlear Implant Eligibility Is Eight Times More Likely in the Hypoplastic Than the Degenerative Endotype of Menière's Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether one of the two recently described MD endotypes-defined by either endolymphatic sac degeneration (MD-dg patients) or hypoplasia (MD-hp patients)-is associated with an increased likelihood of undergoing CI. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective multicenter cross-sectional study. SETTING: Five tertiary referral centers. PATIENTS: CI cohort: 115 adult MD patients with a history of uni- or bilateral CI. Non-CI cohort: 72 MD patients with no CI history. All included patients matched current diagnostic criteria for definite MD. INTERVENTION: Cochlear implantation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Endotype distribution (MD-dg versus MD-hp) between the CI cohort and the non-CI cohort. The endotype was determined using high-resolution CT data based on the angular trajectory of the vestibular aqueduct, following established protocols. Secondary outcomes included disease laterality, age at MD diagnosis, duration of MD, and pre-CI hearing thresholds. RESULTS: The CI cohort included significantly more MD-hp patients than the non-CI cohort (72% versus 24%, p < 0.0001). The odds ratio of CI for an MD-hp patient relative to an MD-dg patient was 8.4 (95% confidence interval, 4.3-16.1). Pre-CI audiometric data showed no significant differences in hearing thresholds between endotypes, neither in the implanted nor in the non-implanted ear. CONCLUSIONS: The MD-hp endotype, frequently associated with bilateral disease and early-age disease onset, is strongly linked to a higher likelihood of CI. Endotyping of MD patients based on endolymphatic sac pathology can effectively stratify their risk of severe hearing loss, guiding personalized audiological follow-up and clinical decisions regarding potential CI.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".