Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Jul 9;21(4):1-7.
doi: 10.5152/iao.2025.251880.

Hearing Preservation After Cochlear Implantation with the Advanced Bionics HiFocus™ SlimJ Electrode Array

Piotr Henryk Skarżyński  1   2   3 , Ewelina Bukato  1 , Elżbieta Gos  1 , Artur Lorens  4 , Adam Walkowiak  4 , Anita Obrycka  4 , Henryk Skarżyński  5
Affiliations

Hearing Preservation After Cochlear Implantation with the Advanced Bionics HiFocus™ SlimJ Electrode Array

Piotr Henryk Skarżyński et al. J Int Adv Otol. .

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Successful cochlear implantation depends on many factors, one of which is the electrode type. The aim of this study was to evaluate it in terms of the preservation of residual hearing, as well as to investigate the effects of patient age and preoperative low-frequency hearing loss. METHODS: Twenty-three patients were implanted unilaterally with the HiFocus™ SlimJ electrode array. Pure tone audiometry (0.125-8 kHz) was performed preoperatively and at 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively. Hearing preservation was established using the HEARRING group formula. RESULTS: Residual hearing was preserved in all patients. For hearing to be preserved, it was found that preoperative low-frequency hearing levels were more important than age. CONCLUSION: Residual hearing was preserved in all the patients who received the HiFocus™ SlimJ electrode array. Hearing preservation depended more on a patient's preoperative low-frequency hearing threshold than their age.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Left panel: correlation between hearing preservation (HP) 6 months after receiving a cochlear implant and age. Right panel: correlation between HP at 6 months and low-frequency pure tone average before cochlear implantation.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Moses LE, Friedmann DR. Cochlear implant indications: a review of third-party payers’ policies for standard and expanded indications. Cochlear Implants Int. 2021;22(4):237 244. ( 10.1080/14670100.2021.1877865) - DOI - PubMed
    1. Skarżyńska MB, Skarżyński PH, Król B, et al. Preservation of hearing following cochlear implantation using different steroid therapy regimens: a prospective clinical study. Med Sci Monit. 2018;24:2437 2445. ( 10.12659/msm.906210) - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rostkowska J, Skarzynski PH, Kobosko J, Gos E, Skarzynski H. Health-related quality of life in adults with profound postlingual hearing loss before and after cochlear implantation. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2021;278(9):3393 3399. ( 10.1007/s00405-021-06866-7) - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Shiomi Y, Naito Y, Honjo I, et al. Cochlear implant in patients with residual hearing. Auris Nasus Larynx. 1999;26(4):369 374. ( 10.1016/S0385-8146(99)00016-4) - DOI - PubMed
    1. Finke M, Bönitz H, Lyxell B, Illg A. Cochlear implant effectiveness in postlingual single-sided deaf individuals: what’s the point? Int J Audiol. 2017;56(6):417 423. ( 10.1080/14992027.2017.1296595) - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources