Literature DB >> 24335932

Insertion depth angles of cochlear implant arrays with varying length: a temporal bone study.

Annett Franke-Trieger1, Claude Jolly, Alexander Darbinjan, Thomas Zahnert, Dirk Mürbe.   

Abstract

HYPOTHESIS: The aim of the study is to investigate the insertion depth angles for different types of electrode arrays and its variability depending on the individual cochlear size.
BACKGROUND: Preoperative estimation of the insertion depth angles for different electrode arrays can help surgeons choose the optimal electrode length, especially for low-frequency residual hearing preservation.
METHODS: Four different electrode arrays varying in lengths (20, 24, 28, and 31 mm) were inserted in 10 temporal bones to quantify the insertion depth angle of each inserted electrode. High-resolution 3D radiographs provided by Flat Panel Computed Volume Tomography (FPCT) were used to determine electrode array insertion depth angle and diameter of the cochlea's basal turn.
RESULTS: The high-resolution FPCT images from all electrode arrays inserted into the temporal bones allowed reliable measurements of insertion depth angles. In particular, statistically significant different insertion depth angles between the various array types were identified. The insertion of the 20-, 24-, 28-, and 31-mm arrays yielded a mean insertion depth angle of 341 degrees (SD, 22 degrees), 477 degrees (SD, 36 degrees), 587 degrees (SD, 42 degrees), and 673 degrees (SD, 38 degrees), respectively. Furthermore, a statistically significant negative correlation between insertion depth angle and diameter of the cochlea's basal turn was found for the 20- and 31-mm arrays.
CONCLUSION: The results suggest an individually adapted length of electrode arrays, which should be taken into account for an improved decision paradigm for patients scheduled for cochlear implantation. This is of particular importance for patients with low-frequency residual hearing.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24335932     DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000000211

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Otol Neurotol        ISSN: 1531-7129            Impact factor:   2.311


  10 in total

1.  Estimation of insertion depth angle based on cochlea diameter and linear insertion depth: a prediction tool for the CI422.

Authors:  Annett Franke-Trieger; Dirk Mürbe
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2014-11-02       Impact factor: 2.503

2.  Response Changes During Insertion of a Cochlear Implant Using Extracochlear Electrocochleography.

Authors:  Christopher K Giardina; Tatyana E Khan; Stephen H Pulver; Oliver F Adunka; Craig A Buchman; Kevin D Brown; Harold C Pillsbury; Douglas C Fitzpatrick
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2018 Nov/Dec       Impact factor: 3.570

3.  Insertion Depth for Optimized Positioning of Precurved Cochlear Implant Electrodes.

Authors:  Rueben A Banalagay; Robert F Labadie; Srijata Chakravorti; Jack H Noble
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2020-09       Impact factor: 2.619

4.  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.  Computational Evaluation of Cochlear Implant Surgery Outcomes Accounting for Uncertainty and Parameter Variability.

Authors:  Nerea Mangado; Jordi Pons-Prats; Martí Coma; Pavel Mistrík; Gemma Piella; Mario Ceresa; Miguel Á González Ballester
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2018-05-23       Impact factor: 4.566

6.  The Effect of Cochlear Size on Cochlear Implantation Outcomes.

Authors:  Jafri Kuthubutheen; Amandeep Grewal; Sean Symons; Julian Nedzelski; David Shipp; Vincent Lin; Joseph Chen
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2019-06-04       Impact factor: 3.411

7.  A novel cochlear measurement that predicts inner-ear malformation.

Authors:  Tawfiq Khurayzi; Fida Almuhawas; Abdulrahman Alsanosi; Yassin Abdelsamad; Úna Doyle; Anandhan Dhanasingh
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-04-01       Impact factor: 4.379

8.  Comparison of Interaural Electrode Pairing Methods for Bilateral Cochlear Implants.

Authors:  Hongmei Hu; Mathias Dietz
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2015-12-01       Impact factor: 3.293

9.  Encoding a Melody Using Only Temporal Information for Cochlear-Implant and Normal-Hearing Listeners.

Authors:  Ann E Todd; Griet Mertens; Paul Van de Heyning; David M Landsberger
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2017 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.293

10.  Patient specific selection of lateral wall cochlear implant electrodes based on anatomical indication ranges.

Authors:  Max Eike Timm; Omid Majdani; Tobias Weller; Mayra Windeler; Thomas Lenarz; Andreas Büchner; Rolf Benedikt Salcher
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-10-26       Impact factor: 3.240

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.