Cited by 31Hearing Loss and RehabilitationHearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, GeneticsNeuroscience and Neural Engineering

Histological Reaction to Polyimide Films in the Cochlea

Haggerty, Holly Susan, Lusted, Hugh S.·1989·Acta Oto-Laryngologica

Abstract

The biocompatibility of commercially available polyimides was examined in relation to the sensory and neural structures of the cochlea. Thin films of four different polyimides were prepared as substrates for photolithographically produced scala tympani electrode arrays and implanted in 32 cat cochleae. Following at least three months implantation time, the animals were sacrificed and the cochlea were evaluated histologically for toxicity, differences in the severity of ototoxic effects among the four polyimide groups, and relationships among the different kinds of histopathology secondary to implantation. Findings included the following. Inflammatory reaction to the implants, when present, was generally mild and confined to the immediate vicinity of the implant. Additionally, ototoxic effects were essentially the same across the four groups. Finally, a clear interdependence among the different kinds of cochlear damage secondary to implantation was demonstrated.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3109/00016488909127474

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Polyimide-based neural implants show good biocompatibility with respect to toxicity and biostability when used as cuff and regenerative-type electrodes.

    “Polyimide-based neural implants (Stieglitz et al., 2000) showed good biocompatibility (Haggerty and Lusted, 1989; Richardson et al., 1993) with respect to toxicity as well as biostability (Navarro et al., 1998; Rodrı ´guez et al., 2000) when used as cuff and regenerative-type electrodes.”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Haggerty, H. S., & Lusted, H. S.
Affiliations
Stanford Medicine (US)
Venue
Acta Oto-Laryngologica
Published
1989-01
Volume
107
Issue
1-2
Pages
13-22
ISSN
  • 0001-6489 (ISSN-L)
  • 1651-2251
OpenAlex
W1978215662
Cited by
31
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
0.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Acta Oto-Laryngologica (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (N01-NS32352)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Sensory Systems › Hearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, Genetics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
Keywords
polyimide films, cochlear implants, biocompatibility, ototoxicity, histopathology, inflammation, auditory nerve, cat cochlea
MeSH terms
Animals, Cats, Cochlea, Cochlear Implants, Materials Testing, Resins, Synthetic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review