Literature DB >> 12125990

Modiolar proximity of three perimodiolar cochlear implant electrodes.

Thomas J Balkany1, Adrien A Eshraghi, Nathaniel Yang.   

Abstract

A new generation of cochlear implant electrodes has been designed to position the stimulating contacts close to the modiolus in order to reduce power consumption and increase stimulation selectivity. The purpose of this study was to assess electrode position in the cochlea for three recently designed electrodes. Fifteen cadaveric temporal bones were implanted with one of three perimodiolar electrode arrays: Nucleus Contour; Med-El Combi40+ PM (developmental version); and Clarion HiFocus II. Image-enhanced videofluoroscopy and computer morphometrics were used to assess stimulating contact position relative to the modiolus. The mean distance (+/- 1 standard deviation) to the modiolus for all electrode contacts was 0.33 (+/-0.24), 0.30 (+/-0.27) and 0.16 mm (+/-0.19) for the Contour, Combi40+ PM and HiFocus II arrays, respectively. In addition, dynamic videofluoroscopy was used to correlate device-specific insertion characteristics with contact-to-modiolus distance. All three devices were successful in terms of locating electrode contacts very close to the modiolar wall.

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12125990     DOI: 10.1080/00016480260000021

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Otolaryngol        ISSN: 0001-6489            Impact factor:   1.494


  13 in total

1.  Intra-Operative Neural Response Telemetry and Acoustic Reflex Assessment using an Advance-In-Stylet Technique and Modiolus-Hugging: A prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Abdulrahman Hagr
Journal:  Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J       Date:  2011-08-15

2.  Effect of stimulus and recording parameters on spatial spread of excitation and masking patterns obtained with the electrically evoked compound action potential in cochlear implants.

Authors:  Michelle L Hughes; Lisa J Stille
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 3.570

3.  Modelling encapsulation tissue around cochlear implant electrodes.

Authors:  T Hanekom
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 2.602

4.  Multisection CT as a valuable tool in the postoperative assessment of cochlear implant patients.

Authors:  Berit M Verbist; Johan H M Frijns; Jakob Geleijns; Mark A van Buchem
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 3.825

5.  Cochlear implant electrode configuration effects on activation threshold and tonotopic selectivity.

Authors:  Russell L Snyder; John C Middlebrooks; Ben H Bonham
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2007-10-11       Impact factor: 3.208

6.  Would an endosteal CI-electrode make sense? Comparison of the auditory nerve excitability from different stimulation sites using ESRT measurements and mathematical models.

Authors:  Hans Wilhelm Pau; Annekathrin Grünbaum; Karsten Ehrt; Rüdiger Dahl; Tino Just; Ursula van Rienen
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2013-05-09       Impact factor: 2.503

7.  Electrode interaction in pediatric cochlear implant subjects.

Authors:  Marc D Eisen; Kevin H Franck
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2005-06-10

Review 8.  Cochlear implants: system design, integration, and evaluation.

Authors:  Fan-Gang Zeng; Stephen Rebscher; William Harrison; Xiaoan Sun; Haihong Feng
Journal:  IEEE Rev Biomed Eng       Date:  2008-11-05

Review 9.  The cochlear implant: historical aspects and future prospects.

Authors:  Adrien A Eshraghi; Ronen Nazarian; Fred F Telischi; Suhrud M Rajguru; Eric Truy; Chhavi Gupta
Journal:  Anat Rec (Hoboken)       Date:  2012-10-08       Impact factor: 2.064

10.  Design and fabrication of multichannel cochlear implants for animal research.

Authors:  Stephen J Rebscher; Alexander M Hetherington; Russell L Snyder; Patricia A Leake; Ben H Bonham
Journal:  J Neurosci Methods       Date:  2007-05-21       Impact factor: 2.390

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.