Is Advanced Bionics really "behind" in their technology?

M

mikatehgr8t

New Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2010
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
Hi! I have been meeting with a surgeon and audiologist since April-ish about getting CI. I originally chose Advanced Bionics for their waterproof CI (Neptune) which is necessary for a person like me who likes to hear in water situations. Like river rafting, for EX. That's a situation where I need to hear in case of an emergency. My surgery is July 18th for Med-El Opus 2 XS and I chose Med-El because they can cover all the sounds in the cochlea.

What made me reconsider AB was the surgeon told me AB is behind in their technology...basically "having AB is like having a first generation I-phone when there's a fourth generation out"

I'm starting to reconsider my decision. Med-El offers no protection against the water like AB and Cochlear (correct me if I'm wrong). I feel like I should have chose Cochlea since it can be in the water for a bit.

What do you think?
 
.... I feel AB is more advanced technology wise... I mean, ClearVoice? Waterproof CI, better protection of the internal device (it can tolerate up to 6 joules, whereas Med-El and cochlear are between 1-3 joules), only 25% capacity of the internal device is being used, so it still has 75% more to go for further upgrades/advancements (Med-El is about 50%, while Cochlear is just about maxed out capacity wise with no further room for further technological advances, they'd have to come up with a whole new internal device with more room for such advancements), etc. And keep in mind with Cochlear, it's not wise to SWIM with their device on. Has to be still clean water, only up to 3 feet for half an hour, which doesn't even compare to the Neptune. And as for Med-El's longer electrode array, it really doesn't make that much difference sound-wise.

All three companies are going to do what they can to keep up with the technology, but I felt AB was further ahead than the other 2 myself.

Check out cochlear implant HELP and see the stats on the different devices.

The way I see it, Cochlear keeps coming up with new processors (with some improvements), they came up with the N5 internal implant but it's pretty much the same package as the N24 (just thinner and different shaped), but they haven't done much to improve speech processing strategies (and have been focusing a lot of their attention on the BAHA's from my understanding). I don't know much about Med-El as I don't pay as much attention to them. AB, they're always working away to improve EVERYTHING, processor design, new speech processing strategies, and are even currently working on a newer, smaller BTE processor rumored to be released 1-2 years from now.

All 3 implants do get the job done either way. It just depends on what you want most from the implant as each device will have their pros and cons.
 
I am a cochlear user, but as far as I know, AB has better technology
 
Cdmeggers has given you some great information to start from.

Surgeons focus on installing the electrodes. The audiologists are the ones with the experience and exposure to what happens after the implant is turned on. Some surgeons do have a stake in one particular company so they may push it over others.

It's very important you do real research to be sure about your decision. I am pretty sure if you start digging and fully understand what you are reading.. you are going to be shocked your surgeon made that claim at all. Frankly, they install the implants. It's the audiologists that have the direct exposure and experience with programming them and seeing what happens after you turn them on. When it came to my surgeon, I was more interested in his expertise in implanting and what kind of incision he used. He had nothing to say on which one to choose.
 
i know more CI users than AB users. Don't ask why. My hus liked AB and CI both like everyone says so. My hub picked CI because of long years while AB have better technology.

I do not know much but which is more easily to fall off from head, CI or AB? you said you like involved the water so you ll need to add something to hold CI or AB so it wont fall off.
 
cdmeggers said:
.... I feel AB is more advanced technology wise... I mean, ClearVoice? Waterproof CI, better protection of the internal device (it can tolerate up to 6 joules, whereas Med-El and cochlear are between 1-3 joules), only 25% capacity of the internal device is being used, so it still has 75% more to go for further upgrades/advancements (Med-El is about 50%, while Cochlear is just about maxed out capacity wise with no further room for further technological advances, they'd have to come up with a whole new internal device with more room for such advancements), etc. And keep in mind with Cochlear, it's not wise to SWIM with their device on. Has to be still clean water, only up to 3 feet for half an hour, which doesn't even compare to the Neptune. And as for Med-El's longer electrode array, it really doesn't make that much difference sound-wise.

All three companies are going to do what they can to keep up with the technology, but I felt AB was further ahead than the other 2 myself.

Check out cochlear implant HELP and see the stats on the different devices.

The way I see it, Cochlear keeps coming up with new processors (with some improvements), they came up with the N5 internal implant but it's pretty much the same package as the N24 (just thinner and different shaped), but they haven't done much to improve speech processing strategies (and have been focusing a lot of their attention on the BAHA's from my understanding). I don't know much about Med-El as I don't pay as much attention to them. AB, they're always working away to improve EVERYTHING, processor design, new speech processing strategies, and are even currently working on a newer, smaller BTE processor rumored to be released 1-2 years from now.

All 3 implants do get the job done either way. It just depends on what you want most from the implant as each device will have their pros and cons.
Click to expand...

I am not going to sing the praises of any one device but I can absolutely dispute that Cochlear is not doing research to improve strategies. I was in several of their Bi-lateral research studies over a couple year period and the have several different ones going on at the same time and that is just here in the USA (Denver) they do research at other places like Australia. I actually worked with a couple of the researchers from there that were here in the US doing research.
One thing I can prove is that more electrode is not necessarily better. Due to one of my CI's being too deep, they remapped both CI's to align to the bilateral CT scan they did. Result was improved unilateral hearing in the ear that was too deep and improved bilateral scores and localization of sound. They probably spend more on research than both other companies combined. Also look at percentage of Internal component failure (the impant itself. you will see Cochlear is the lowest failure rate) for the external I think AB is lower. however the processor is much easier to replace if it fails than the implant. AB also had to stop selling for a while due to repeated non-compliance with FDA mandates due to contamination and safety issues of the implant. I do not know the other brands well but Cochlear strives on making devices backwards compatible. My initial Implant was with the 3G processor and now the same implant will work with the Freedom and the 5 versions. There is also much more they are definitely not maxed out on the capabilities of the device or the implants... Check battery life too between the various brands.
Also find a surgeon that has experience with the brand you are getting.
 
soutthpaw said:
I am not going to sing the praises of any one device but I can absolutely dispute that Cochlear is not doing research to improve strategies. I was in several of their Bi-lateral research studies over a couple year period and the have several different ones going on at the same time and that is just here in the USA (Denver) they do research at other places like Australia. I actually worked with a couple of the researchers from there that were here in the US doing research.
One thing I can prove is that more electrode is not necessarily better. Due to one of my CI's being too deep, they remapped both CI's to align to the bilateral CT scan they did. Result was improved unilateral hearing in the ear that was too deep and improved bilateral scores and localization of sound. They probably spend more on research than both other companies combined. Also look at percentage of Internal component failure (the impant itself. you will see Cochlear is the lowest failure rate) for the external I think AB is lower. however the processor is much easier to replace if it fails than the implant. AB also had to stop selling for a while due to repeated non-compliance with FDA mandates due to contamination and safety issues of the implant. I do not know the other brands well but Cochlear strives on making devices backwards compatible. My initial Implant was with the 3G processor and now the same implant will work with the Freedom and the 5 versions. There is also much more they are definitely not maxed out on the capabilities of the device or the implants... Check battery life too between the various brands.
Also find a surgeon that has experience with the brand you are getting.
Click to expand...

There is way too much incorrect information in your post. AB did not have to "stop selling for a while due to repeated non-compliance with FDA mandates." AB did a voluntary recall on a their internal implant and found two failed devices. That was AB's call, not the FDA's.

The rest....you really need to have a better understanding of implant technology and hearing. For example, few would argue that deeper electrode insertion is bad. Lack of low frequency stimulation is a recognized facts with CIs. They attempted to match your two implants to make it easier for you, but delivery of the full frequency spectrum for CI users is a goal, not reducing them. There is more, but I'll leave it at that.
 
Comparing internal failure rates is a good thing to do, but make sure you're comparing apples to apples. Cochlear considers an implant to have failed only if they can find the problem after it has been removed. AB considers an implant to have failed if it has been removed.

I had a group of electrical engineers review the technical specs of the devices, and they thought the AB implant system was easily the more advanced of the two. They were particularly impressed with the multiple current sources for the electrodes as opposed to one current source for cochlear.
 
Ringing in on MED-EL

You've received a lot of good advice here, am going to chip in my 2 cents as a MED-EL user.

I chose MED-EL also for the range of sound it could provide and I have not been disappointed. In fact I am able to hear a lot of sounds that my own audiologist told me I would not be able to hear, such as birds and being able to pick out different instruments when listening to music. I was so happy with my implant that I decided to go bilateral a few years ago. The internal part of my first side is an older version of the implant and I was able to upgrade to the Opus on the outside when it became available to take advantage of the new technology. So the implants are backwards compatible.

As far as waterproof goes, I don't think that any of the implants are truly waterproof. Think of it like this, if you drop your cell phone which is another electronic device, in water, sometimes it will work but most of the time it won't. So for my own peace of mind, I do what I can to minimize the risk of the implant getting wet whenever possible. I have gone canoeing with my implant on and when I did, I wore a sweatband on my head to keep it more secure. If you are able to choose different battery packs, another option would be to choose the baby bte as one of your options. Then you can secure it on your clothing with a safety pin in water situations.
 
pamc86 said:
You've received a lot of good advice here, am going to chip in my 2 cents as a MED-EL user.

I chose MED-EL also for the range of sound it could provide and I have not been disappointed. In fact I am able to hear a lot of sounds that my own audiologist told me I would not be able to hear, such as birds and being able to pick out different instruments when listening to music. I was so happy with my implant that I decided to go bilateral a few years ago. The internal part of my first side is an older version of the implant and I was able to upgrade to the Opus on the outside when it became available to take advantage of the new technology. So the implants are backwards compatible.

As far as waterproof goes, I don't think that any of the implants are truly waterproof. Think of it like this, if you drop your cell phone which is another electronic device, in water, sometimes it will work but most of the time it won't. So for my own peace of mind, I do what I can to minimize the risk of the implant getting wet whenever possible. I have gone canoeing with my implant on and when I did, I wore a sweatband on my head to keep it more secure. If you are able to choose different battery packs, another option would be to choose the baby bte as one of your options. Then you can secure it on your clothing with a safety pin in water situations.
Click to expand...

Just so you know, the Neptune processor for Advanced Bionics recipients IS truly waterproof. You are correct though, in that no current BTE processor is truly waterproof, so thank you for your suggestions on how to manage being around water while using a BTE.
 
Happy Mom

Hi, I just found your question and felt that I have to reply because I was in the same situation few years ago when trying to choose implant company for my than 12 month old daughter . I stayed up late at night searching for answers and opinions on the web , I asked audiologist ,speech therapists and surgeons because I realized that this is one of the most important decisions I will make for our daughter's future . I wanted her to have the best sound quality available for proper speech development and music appreciation. I will guide you through my thinking process and decision making - I hope it will help you !
The very first decision was made by our daughters surgeon who stated that he does not implant his little patients with AB anymore d/t multiple recalls . He is a renowned pediatric surgeon in the DFW area so when he speaks - you listen carefully. If I really wanted AB implant he would refer us to someone else.
I wanted my daughter to begin to speak as soon as possible which means sound quality and all its available frequencies were a priority . The whole cochlea has to be used and only MED-EL offered us this option. There is a reason for the cochlea's shape and "design"( please excuse my simplicity in thinking ) and I believed that full cochlea coverage by electrode will be the best.
I wanted an easy to use processor which will automatically adjust to environmental sounds without pressing any buttons - I realized that my daughter will eventually go to school and I wanted her to be just like other kids -and she really has this freedom now.
I also knew what I did not want - recall letters , another surgery , early morning phone calls to manufacturer "because her ears don't work and she has to go to school " etc. As the matter of fact it was really my priority .
I do not believe that we should make our decision based on manufacturers promises that something great or advanced is in the making - it may not be that great after all , it may not be FDA approved or it may be just another failure. I was not sold on waterproofing promises - I do not believe that anyone showers or swims with their hearing aides or cochlear implant processors on their ears ( as well as $ 40 K watches despite warranties !).
We travel with my daughter around the globe , visit beaches , have pool in our house and taking off her "ears " was never an issue or problem.
My daughter is almost 5 years old right now, learns two languages at the same time , attends dance classes and never missed any of her favorite activities because of the equipment malfunction . I am glad that you consider MED-EL cochlear implants , I am just a happy mom who wanted to share my story with you because I deeply believe in this product . Please contact me with any questions , I will be happy to hear from you, Maggie
 
Hi there

I have a friend with an AB and I know of folks with Cochlear as well. Please be warned that both of these have been riddled with recalls. Also, AB (& Cochlear) is claiming to be waterproof, yet, it is my understanding that there is absolutely nothing in their warranty that protects/insures the device against water/moisture. When you think about it....how can a device like this be waterproof?

Don't sacrifice the big picture (sound) for a claim. I hope some folks, that are active in sports, comment here but I do know that the vast majority use Ear Gear with fantastic results. On top of the fact that AB & Cochlear devices are HUGE!!!:shock:

I personally chose the Med El for obvious reasons although I have to admit I was initially swayed by AB's marketing & claims, as well. I left the homework & decision up to my husband who comes from a very long line of engineers. I would have been absolutely miserable if I had gone with AB (Cochlear wasn't even in the running). You are really on the ball with your choice based on cochlear coverage...good for you. This was a deciding factor for us, as well, and the results are proven every single day.

What your surgeon has stated about AB being behind is what I have been hearing (literally...:P), as well. That's another reason my husband chose Med El & I can tell you that I hear things that he doesn't!!

I hope this helps and stay in touch. I'd love to hear of your progress & what you ultimately decide.
 
Reply to: Is Advanced Bionics really "behind" in their technology?

Hi there

I have a friend with an AB and I know of folks with Cochlear as well. Please be warned that both of these have been riddled with recalls. Also, AB (& Cochlear) is claiming to be waterproof, yet, it is my understanding that there is absolutely nothing in their warranty that protects/insures the device against water/moisture. When you think about it....how can a device like this be waterproof?

Don't sacrifice the big picture (sound) for a claim. I hope some folks, that are active in sports, comment here but I do know that the vast majority use Ear Gear with fantastic results. On top of the fact that AB & Cochlear devices are HUGE!!!:shock:

I personally chose the Med El for obvious reasons although I have to admit I was initially swayed by AB's marketing & claims, as well. I left the homework & decision up to my husband who comes from a very long line of engineers. I would have been absolutely miserable if I had gone with AB (Cochlear wasn't even in the running). You are really on the ball with your choice based on cochlear coverage...good for you. This was a deciding factor for us, as well, and the results are proven every single day.

What your surgeon has stated about AB being behind is what I have been hearing (literally...:P), as well. That's another reason my husband chose Med El & I can tell you that I hear things that he doesn't!!

I hope this helps and stay in touch. I'd love to hear of your progress & what you ultimately decide.



mikatehgr8t said:
Hi! I have been meeting with a surgeon and audiologist since April-ish about getting CI. I originally chose Advanced Bionics for their waterproof CI (Neptune) which is necessary for a person like me who likes to hear in water situations. Like river rafting, for EX. That's a situation where I need to hear in case of an emergency. My surgery is July 18th for Med-El Opus 2 XS and I chose Med-El because they can cover all the sounds in the cochlea.

What made me reconsider AB was the surgeon told me AB is behind in their technology...basically "having AB is like having a first generation I-phone when there's a fourth generation out"

I'm starting to reconsider my decision. Med-El offers no protection against the water like AB and Cochlear (correct me if I'm wrong). I feel like I should have chose Cochlea since it can be in the water for a bit.

What do you think?
Click to expand...
 
mskaty said:
Hi there

I have a friend with an AB and I know of folks with Cochlear as well. Please be warned that both of these have been riddled with recalls. Also, AB (& Cochlear) is claiming to be waterproof, yet, it is my understanding that there is absolutely nothing in their warranty that protects/insures the device against water/moisture. When you think about it....how can a device like this be waterproof?

Don't sacrifice the big picture (sound) for a claim. I hope some folks, that are active in sports, comment here but I do know that the vast majority use Ear Gear with fantastic results. On top of the fact that AB & Cochlear devices are HUGE!!!:shock:

I personally chose the Med El for obvious reasons although I have to admit I was initially swayed by AB's marketing & claims, as well. I left the homework & decision up to my husband who comes from a very long line of engineers. I would have been absolutely miserable if I had gone with AB (Cochlear wasn't even in the running). You are really on the ball with your choice based on cochlear coverage...good for you. This was a deciding factor for us, as well, and the results are proven every single day.

What your surgeon has stated about AB being behind is what I have been hearing (literally...:P), as well. That's another reason my husband chose Med El & I can tell you that I hear things that he doesn't!!

I hope this helps and stay in touch. I'd love to hear of your progress & what you ultimately decide.
Click to expand...

Aha! So you are here to sell MedEl...
 
I gotta ask the obvious...where or how in the world did you come up with such a conclusion?
 
AB vs Cochlear vs Medel

All the CI devices are effective and do work well. There are significant differences among them and I suggest that people do take the time to evaluate the pro's and con's of each before making a decision. Each manufacturer claims some point of excellence and you have to keep in mind the marketing has a goal to highlight whatever strenghts they have. Remember that there is always some hype. You need to look for the facts and read between the lines. There are many factors that you need to keep in mind in trying to figure out which CI is the best. Read studies that show comparative performance data for all the manufacturers. Different manufacturers will only show the data that appears more favorable to their product, so you need to read all the different studies that you can find and draw you own conclusions. I did all the research and decided on the Medel as being the best fit for my needs. Now I am a Bilateral Medel CI user. Many of my friends use AB and Cochlear and are doing well with them. I am doing extremelly well with the Medel's myself. My speech discrimination went from zero to about 80 % bilaterally. My music enjoyement which was minimal went to the stratosphere. I never cared about who the musical groups where and who sang what... now I have a long list of favorites and I am continuously discovering new groups and songs that just take me to heaven. Something I never dreamed I could have. My personal results don't mean that anyone getting a Medel will have the same experience. The results vary from person to person and it really depends how much residual hearing you have and how long you have been deaf. There are a lot of variables. Getting a CI can be a life changing event, so don't hesitate to get one, but do some serious reading before you decide which will be the best one for you... Find out which CI's provide an array that is able to reach all the hearing nerves inside the cochlea. Which ones are the thinnest and provide the deepest penetration because the deeper you can go the better the musical enjoyment, etc. Also consider the recall history, etc. - FYI, I will be at the NAD Convention in Louisville if anyone wants to discuss CI's. I will be helping MED-EL in their booth as an advocate and will be happy to talk (sign) with anyone. Cheers! Joe
 
mskaty said:
Hi there

I have a friend with an AB and I know of folks with Cochlear as well. Please be warned that both of these have been riddled with recalls. Also, AB (& Cochlear) is claiming to be waterproof, yet, it is my understanding that there is absolutely nothing in their warranty that protects/insures the device against water/moisture. When you think about it....how can a device like this be waterproof?

Don't sacrifice the big picture (sound) for a claim. I hope some folks, that are active in sports, comment here but I do know that the vast majority use Ear Gear with fantastic results. On top of the fact that AB & Cochlear devices are HUGE!!!:shock:

I personally chose the Med El for obvious reasons although I have to admit I was initially swayed by AB's marketing & claims, as well. I left the homework & decision up to my husband who comes from a very long line of engineers. I would have been absolutely miserable if I had gone with AB (Cochlear wasn't even in the running). You are really on the ball with your choice based on cochlear coverage...good for you. This was a deciding factor for us, as well, and the results are proven every single day.

What your surgeon has stated about AB being behind is what I have been hearing (literally...:P), as well. That's another reason my husband chose Med El & I can tell you that I hear things that he doesn't!!

I hope this helps and stay in touch. I'd love to hear of your progress & what you ultimately decide.
Click to expand...

What claims and marketing by AB are you referring to? First, the Neptune IS waterproof. It is not a marketing claim. It's a design fact. You can handle and examine the processor and realize that the unit is completely sealed with the control module removed (which doesn't need to be attached once you've set your volume, program and sensitivity.) The battery compartment, which is outside the sealed area of the processor, has a rubber seal around where the cap goes over it. There are two headpieces.. one for everyday use and one that is waterproof. On top of all of that, the warranty specifically covers any possible water damage. They can do that having the confidence that it is very unlikely to happen.

Where have you been hearing that AB is behind? Any engineer making that claim did not do their homework at all or fails to understand implant technology. You have no idea if you would be miserable with AB because you have no idea how the implant works, what it is capable of, or how it sounds. You have no clue what it is like to go from 16 channels to 120 channels (which is only the limit set by the currently available strategy.) You may possibly get something similar down the road because you do have multiple current sources (AB has 16 individual power sources and Cochlear has one) which is why I've always said that if it wasn't going to be AB, it would be Med El.

Multiple current sources are a good thing to have to be future ready and the results have been and continue to churn out as AB is constantly developing new strategies. Did you ever stop to take a look at the options for strategies available? No? It probably isn't something that occurs to you to do since you just have FSP available to you. You have no real way currently to try different programs to experience what happens when you use different strategies. Having these choices ensures that if one program isn't working out so great for an individual, another will.

Fidelity 120 is not a marketing claim. Post-linguals universally remark on the huge jump in sound quality and resolution when they go from Hi-Res (which, just like yours, will sound good and normal after it settles in) using 16 channels to Fidelity 120 using 120 channels. Sound takes on an immediate natural quality. The implant is capable of producing far more channels.

ClearVoice, which requires 120 channels, has very obvious benefit immediately when turned on. It's probably difficult for you to understand since you don't have the technology available to use something like it. Some folks get confused and think it is similar to the type of hearing in noise technology you find in hearing aids. It is not. It's done at the strategy level, similar to your brain hearing road noise while in a car and deciding to filter that noise out while letting speech in.

Multiple power sources enable current steering. That means they can direct current to any part of the cochlea. This is what factors in for music by increasing the pitch resolution. They can also direct that current deep into the cochlea, exceeding the electrode's reach. Figure out what that means.

As for focusing on the processors..... Cochlear is the current winner in the size war among BTE processors. AB's Neptune is smaller than it appears to be in photos, not to mention it's possible to go almost completely incognito with it if you wear a hat. The problem with focusing on processors is they come and go. In the end, you will wind up with the largest BTE processor of the big three due to AB currently producing the next BTE processor in conjunction with their parent company partner, Phonak. You are only kidding yourself if you don't factor in the technology going in to that processor based on Phonak's known technology. It's never a good idea to make a decision based on the processor unless that is the most important factor to you.

I understand you are happy with your implant and you should be. You made your choice and you are loving your results. I hope that for anybody who gets an implant. The difference between you and me is you actually don't understand the other implants and are going about making false comments. I actually do understand the other implants and how they work. I've stood up for Med El right here on these forums. They are currently the only other implant manufacturer that is attempting to keep the internal technology moving forward. Hopefully they are developing a strategy that makes use of the multiple power sources so you can experience that difference for yourself.
 
Back
Top