Literature DB >> 17562059

Partial withdrawal of deeply inserted cochlear electrodes: observations of two patients.

Maria-Izabel Kos1, Colette Boex, Jean-Philippe Guyot, Marco Pelizzone.   

Abstract

Three patients implanted in our department received the preformed Clarion S-Series cochlear implant with the electrode Positioning System (EPS). The EPS is a device designed to bring the electrode array closer to the modiolus and deeper into the cochlea. Two of these patients still complained because they were perceiving too low pitch sounds, and because of the presence of echoes and poor discrimination after 3 years of implant use and many tuning sessions. We hypothesized that the electrode array was too deeply inserted and could be stimulating overlapping populations of neurons in the low frequency range. The EPS was removed through a transcanal tympanotomy under local anesthesia and the array was pulled 2-3 mm out of the cochlea. The angle of electrode insertion into the cochlea and the patients' performances on consonant identification tests were evaluated before and after the removal surgery and over the long term, 3 years after the surgery. Immediately after the removal surgery the angle of insertion of the electrode array decreased from 720 degrees to 485 degrees in one case and from 675 degrees to 485 degrees in the other. Both patients reported subjective improvements after the removal which were confirmed by tests of performance at the long term by one of the patients. These observations show that (1) the electrode array can be moved without deterioration of performances even several years after being implanted; revision surgery may be beneficial in some cases, (2) neighboring electrodes might stimulate overlapping populations of neurons, inducing a deterioration of performances; for anatomical reasons, this is most likely to occur in the apex of the cochlea and (3) tuning of the external processor should be a customized procedure.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17562059     DOI: 10.1007/s00405-007-0354-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol        ISSN: 0937-4477            Impact factor:   2.503


  18 in total

1.  Medialization of electrode array in cochlear implantation.

Authors:  S J Watts; P Lindsey; M Hawthorne
Journal:  J Laryngol Otol       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 1.469

2.  The Nucleus Contour electrode array: a radiological and histological study.

Authors:  B Richter; A Aschendorff; P Lohnstein; H Husstedt; H Nagursky; R Laszig
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 3.325

3.  Surgical technique for the CLARION cochlear implant.

Authors:  T J Balkany; N L Cohen; B J Gantz
Journal:  Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl       Date:  1999-04

4.  The consequences of neural degeneration regarding optimal cochlear implant position in scala tympani: a model approach.

Authors:  Jeroen J Briaire; Johan H M Frijns
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2006-03-07       Impact factor: 3.208

5.  The pathology of sudden deafness.

Authors:  H F Schuknecht; R S Kimura; P M Naufal
Journal:  Acta Otolaryngol       Date:  1973 Aug-Sep       Impact factor: 1.494

6.  The benefits of cochlear implantation in the geriatric population.

Authors:  S B Waltzman; N L Cohen; W H Shapiro
Journal:  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 3.497

7.  Radiologic evaluation of multichannel intracochlear implant insertion depth.

Authors:  M A Marsh; J Xu; P J Blamey; L A Whitford; S A Xu; J M Silverman; G M Clark
Journal:  Am J Otol       Date:  1993-07

8.  Acoustic to electric pitch comparisons in cochlear implant subjects with residual hearing.

Authors:  Colette Boëx; Lionel Baud; Grégoire Cosendai; Alain Sigrist; Maria-Izabel Kós; Marco Pelizzone
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2006-02-01

9.  Vowel and consonant identification tests can be used to compare performances in a multilingual group of cochlear implant patients.

Authors:  M Pelizzone; C Boëx; P Montandon
Journal:  ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec       Date:  1993 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.538

10.  Hearing results with deep insertion of cochlear implant electrodes.

Authors:  A V Hodges; E Villasuso; T Balkany; P A Bird; S Butts; D Lee; O Gomez
Journal:  Am J Otol       Date:  1999-01
View more
  5 in total

1.  Partial tripolar cochlear implant stimulation: Spread of excitation and forward masking in the inferior colliculus.

Authors:  Julie Arenberg Bierer; Steven M Bierer; John C Middlebrooks
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2010-08-18       Impact factor: 3.208

2.  A new software tool to optimize frequency table selection for cochlear implants.

Authors:  Daniel Jethanamest; Chin-Tuan Tan; Matthew B Fitzgerald; Mario A Svirsky
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 2.311

3.  Role of electrode placement as a contributor to variability in cochlear implant outcomes.

Authors:  Charles C Finley; Timothy A Holden; Laura K Holden; Bruce R Whiting; Richard A Chole; Gail J Neely; Timothy E Hullar; Margaret W Skinner
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 2.311

4.  Identifying cochlear implant channels with poor electrode-neuron interface: partial tripolar, single-channel thresholds and psychophysical tuning curves.

Authors:  Julie Arenberg Bierer; Kathleen F Faulkner
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 3.570

5.  Investigation of the effect of cochlear implant electrode length on speech comprehension in quiet and noise compared with the results with users of electro-acoustic-stimulation, a retrospective analysis.

Authors:  Andreas Büchner; Angelika Illg; Omid Majdani; Thomas Lenarz
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-05-15       Impact factor: 3.240

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.