Cochlear Reimplantation Rate and Cause: a 22-Year, Single-Center Experience, and a Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review: Erratum : Ear and Hearing

Journal Logo

Erratum

Cochlear Reimplantation Rate and Cause: a 22-Year, Single-Center Experience, and a Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review: Erratum

Ear and Hearing 44(1):p 242, January/February 2023. | DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000001296
  • Free

In the following article by Liu et al. that published online ahead of print in Ear and Hearing on August 15, 2022, “Cochlear Reimplantation Rate and Cause: A 22-Year, Single-Center Experience, and a Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review”, there were several errors that were discovered by the authors:

On page 3, the sentence that reads “The reimplantation rates with Advanced Bionics, Cochlear, Medel, and Nurotron devices were 1.5%, 1.3%, 0.46%, and 10.3%, respectively (P < 0.001).” is incorrect. The correct sentence is: “The reimplantation rates with devices from manufacturer A, B, C, and D were 1.5%, 1.3%, 4.6%, and 10.3%, respectively (P < 0.001).”

On page 7, Tables 2 has incorrect subheadings. The subheadings under “Manufacture, n (%)” in Table 2 read as “Advanced Bionics”, “Cochlear”, “Medel”, and “Nurotron”. The correct subheadings are: “A”, “B”, “C”, and “D”.

On page 8, Tables 3 and 4 have incorrect subheadings. The subheadings under “Manufacture of 1st CI, n (%)” in Table 3 read as “Advanced Bionics”, “Cochlear”, “Medel”, and “Nurotron”. The correct subheadings are: “A”, “B”, “C”, and “D”. The subheadings under “Manufactures” in Table 4 read as “Advanced Bionics”, “Cochlear”, “Medel”, and “Nurotron”. The correct subheadings are: “A”, “B”, “C”, and “D”.

On page 8, Figures 4 and 5 have incorrect data. The correct figures are below:

F1
FIG. 4.:
Kaplan-Meier survival analysis of cochlear implant cumulative survival by age group. The date of the initial CI operation was regarded as the initial event, and that of the reimplantation surgery was set as the failure event. The censored values (the short and vertical lines) mainly result from the end of observation. The survival probability of cochlear implants was not significantly different between children and adults (P = 0.558).
F2
FIG. 5.:
Kaplan-Meier survival analysis of cochlear implant cumulative survival by manufacturer. The date of the initial CI operation was regarded as the initial event, and that of the reimplantation surgery was set as the failure event. The censored values (the short and vertical lines) mainly result from the end of observation. The survival probability of cochlear implants is significantly different among four CI manufactures (P < 0.001).

The authors apologize for these errors.

Reference

Liu H., Yao X., Kong W., Zhang L., Si J., Ding X., Zheng Y., & Zhao Y. (2023). Cochlear reimplantation rate and cause: A 22-year, single-center experience, and a meta-analysis and systematic review. Ear Hear, 44, 43–52.
Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved