Literature DB >> 21541948

Evaluation of the hybrid-L24 electrode using microcomputed tomography.

Colin L W Driscoll1, Matthew L Carlson, Anthony F Fama, John I Lane.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To compare electrode array position, and depth of insertion of the Cochlear Hybrid-L24 electrode array following traditional cochleostomy and round window (RW) insertion. STUDY
DESIGN: Prospective cadaveric temporal bone study.
METHODS: Ten cadaveric temporal bones were implanted with the Hybrid-L24 electrode array; half were introduced through a RW approach, whereas the other half were inserted through a traditional scala tympani cochleostomy. A micro-CT scanner was then used to evaluate electrode position, intracochlear trauma, and depth of insertion.
RESULTS: All electrodes were inserted into the scala tympani without significant resistance. No electrodes demonstrated tip fold-over or through-fracturing of the osseous spiral lamina, basilar membrane, or spiral ligament. The average angular depth of insertion for all 10 electrodes was 252.4°. Compared to cochleostomy insertions, electrodes inserted through the RW more commonly acquired a proximal perimodiolar orientation, followed a more predictable course, and less commonly contacted critical soft tissue structures.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study demonstrate that the Hybrid-L24 electrode can be successfully inserted using a RW or traditional cochleostomy technique with minimal intracochlear trauma. Our data also suggests that with this model, RW insertions may provide particular advantages with respect to hearing preservation over the traditional cochleostomy approach.
Copyright © 2011 The American Laryngological, Rhinological, and Otological Society, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21541948     DOI: 10.1002/lary.21837

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Laryngoscope        ISSN: 0023-852X            Impact factor:   3.325


  6 in total

1.  Insertion trauma of a cochlear implant electrode array with Nitinol inlay.

Authors:  Thomas S Rau; Lenka Harbach; Nick Pawsey; Marcel Kluge; Peter Erfurt; Thomas Lenarz; Omid Majdani
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2016-03-09       Impact factor: 2.503

2.  Insertion forces and intracochlear trauma in temporal bone specimens implanted with a straight atraumatic electrode array.

Authors:  Marjan Mirsalehi; Thomas S Rau; Lenka Harbach; Silke Hügl; Saleh Mohebbi; Thomas Lenarz; Omid Majdani
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2017-02-25       Impact factor: 2.503

3.  Impact of stimulus frequency and recording electrode on electrocochleography in Hybrid cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Viral D Tejani; Rachael L Carroll; Paul J Abbas; Carolyn J Brown
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2019-10-18       Impact factor: 3.208

4.  Residual Hair Cell Responses in Electric-Acoustic Stimulation Cochlear Implant Users with Complete Loss of Acoustic Hearing After Implantation.

Authors:  Viral D Tejani; Jeong-Seo Kim; Jacob J Oleson; Paul J Abbas; Carolyn J Brown; Marlan R Hansen; Bruce J Gantz
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2021-02-04

Review 5.  Complications of Cochleostomy Versus Round Window Surgical Approaches: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Vardhan S Avasarala; Sanjay K Jinka; Anita Jeyakumar
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2022-05-29

6.  Observations on hearing preservation in patients with hybrid-L electrode implanted at Poznan University of Medical Sciences in Poland.

Authors:  Witold Szyfter; Maciej Wróbel; Michał Karlik; Lukasz Borucki; Maciej Stieler; Renata Gibasiewicz; Wojciech Gawęcki; Alicja Sekula
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2012-12-07       Impact factor: 2.503

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.