Literature DB >> 11883768

Surgical technique for the Nucleus Contour cochlear implant.

Noel L Cohen1, J Thomas Roland, Andrew Fishman.   

Abstract

This paper deals with the Nucleus C124R (CS) (Contour) cochlear Implant: its characteristics, differences compared with the previous generation of devices, the perimodiolar electrode, and the surgical technique used for safe insertion. We also discuss the rationale behind perimodiolar electrodes in general, as well as the results of laboratory studies validating the design and safety of this particular electrode array. The differences in surgical technique between this device and prior Nucleus cochlear implants are as follows: the incision and the size of the well, or recess, for the electronics are smaller; the cochleostomy is larger; the posterior portion is placed in a subpericranial pocket, not tied down, before electrode insertion; and the insertion process itself is quite different, due to the nature of the electrode, its size, shape, and stylet. The technique described is that used by one experienced cochlear implant center, and reflect the authors' practice. Clearly, there are other possible variations on this theme, which may be equally satisfactory in other hands. Most surgeons find this device to be easier to place than previous generations: complications to date have been uncommon.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11883768     DOI: 10.1097/00003446-200202001-00007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ear Hear        ISSN: 0196-0202            Impact factor:   3.570


  8 in total

1.  Across-site variation in detection thresholds and maximum comfortable loudness levels for cochlear implants.

Authors:  Bryan E Pfingst; Li Xu
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2003-11-20

2.  Determination of the curling behavior of a preformed cochlear implant electrode array.

Authors:  Thomas S Rau; Omid Majdani; Andreas Hussong; Thomas Lenarz; Martin Leinung
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2010-07-28       Impact factor: 2.924

3.  An automated insertion tool for cochlear implants with integrated force sensing capability.

Authors:  Jan-Philipp Kobler; Daniel Beckmann; Thomas S Rau; Omid Majdani; Tobias Ortmaier
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 2.924

4.  A robot-guided minimally invasive approach for cochlear implant surgery: preliminary results of a temporal bone study.

Authors:  Omid Majdani; Thomas S Rau; Stephan Baron; Hubertus Eilers; Claas Baier; Bodo Heimann; Tobias Ortmaier; Sönke Bartling; Thomas Lenarz; Martin Leinung
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2009-06-13       Impact factor: 2.924

5.  An Easy to use Periosteal Flap for Cochlear Implantation: Experience from a Tertiary Care Centre.

Authors:  Naresh K Panda; Neemu Hage; Roshan Kumar Verma; Jaimanti Bakshi; Gyan Ranjan Nayak; Ramandeep S Virk
Journal:  Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2020-11-18

6.  Periosteal Flap in Cochlear Implantation, How I Do It?

Authors:  Yasser Ahmed Fouad; Thomas Roland
Journal:  J Int Adv Otol       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 1.017

7.  Cochlear implant positioning and fixation using 3D-printed patient specific surgical guides; a cadaveric study.

Authors:  Laura M Markodimitraki; Timen C Ten Harkel; Ronald L A W Bleys; Inge Stegeman; Hans G X M Thomeer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-07-25       Impact factor: 3.752

8.  EEG-based diagnostics of the auditory system using cochlear implant electrodes as sensors.

Authors:  Ben Somers; Christopher J Long; Tom Francart
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-03-08       Impact factor: 4.379

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.