OBJECTIVE: To validate a method of measuring angular depth of insertion (aDOI) as well as positional depth of each electrode contact in a cochlear implant by using intraoperative postinsertion skull radiographs. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review. SETTING: Tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: Intraoperative postinsertion radiographs obtained from 18 cochlear implant recipients were chosen for analysis. One high-resolution computer tomography scan of the head with the electrode in place was also analyzed. One cadaveric temporal bone with an inserted electrode provided additional data for analysis. INTERVENTION: aDOI and position of each electrode contact were measured from the radiographs using readily available software. High-resolution computer tomography imaging of the cochlea and electrode were reconstructed in three dimensions and used to simulate head rotation during intraoperative radiographs. The cadaveric temporal bone was imaged by x-ray at various acquisition angles. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We evaluated the error introduced in measuring aDOI by assessing intra- and inter-rater variability. We also evaluated the error introduced by x-ray acquisition at nonstandardized angles by analyzing the three-dimensional construct and the cadaveric temporal bone. RESULTS: The concordance correlation coefficients for intrarater (0.991) and inter-rater (0.996) variability in aDOI measurement were excellent. The error introduced by nonstandardized x-ray acquisition angles was only -12.5 degrees to +15.8 degrees even at the limits of clinically relevant head rotation. CONCLUSIONS: The intraoperative postinsertion radiograph is sufficient for estimating positional depth of electrode contacts and the aDOI. This measure is robust in the face of nonstandardized x-ray acquisition angles, and shows good intra- and inter-rater variability.
OBJECTIVE: To validate a method of measuring angular depth of insertion (aDOI) as well as positional depth of each electrode contact in a cochlear implant by using intraoperative postinsertion skull radiographs. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review. SETTING: Tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: Intraoperative postinsertion radiographs obtained from 18 cochlear implant recipients were chosen for analysis. One high-resolution computer tomography scan of the head with the electrode in place was also analyzed. One cadaveric temporal bone with an inserted electrode provided additional data for analysis. INTERVENTION: aDOI and position of each electrode contact were measured from the radiographs using readily available software. High-resolution computer tomography imaging of the cochlea and electrode were reconstructed in three dimensions and used to simulate head rotation during intraoperative radiographs. The cadaveric temporal bone was imaged by x-ray at various acquisition angles. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We evaluated the error introduced in measuring aDOI by assessing intra- and inter-rater variability. We also evaluated the error introduced by x-ray acquisition at nonstandardized angles by analyzing the three-dimensional construct and the cadaveric temporal bone. RESULTS: The concordance correlation coefficients for intrarater (0.991) and inter-rater (0.996) variability in aDOI measurement were excellent. The error introduced by nonstandardized x-ray acquisition angles was only -12.5 degrees to +15.8 degrees even at the limits of clinically relevant head rotation. CONCLUSIONS: The intraoperative postinsertion radiograph is sufficient for estimating positional depth of electrode contacts and the aDOI. This measure is robust in the face of nonstandardized x-ray acquisition angles, and shows good intra- and inter-rater variability.
Authors: Margaret W Skinner; Darlene R Ketten; Laura K Holden; Gary W Harding; Peter G Smith; George A Gates; J Gail Neely; G Robert Kletzker; Barry Brunsden; Barbara Blocker Journal: J Assoc Res Otolaryngol Date: 2002-02-27
Authors: Maura K Cosetti; Scott H Troob; Jonathan M Latzman; William H Shapiro; John Thomas Roland; Susan B Waltzman Journal: Otol Neurotol Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 2.311
Authors: Laura K Holden; Charles C Finley; Jill B Firszt; Timothy A Holden; Christine Brenner; Lisa G Potts; Brenda D Gotter; Sallie S Vanderhoof; Karen Mispagel; Gitry Heydebrand; Margaret W Skinner Journal: Ear Hear Date: 2013 May-Jun Impact factor: 3.570
Authors: Sara Gallant; David R Friedmann; Mari Hagiwara; J Thomas Roland; Mario A Svirsky; Daniel Jethanamest Journal: Otol Neurotol Date: 2019-03 Impact factor: 2.311
Authors: Michael W Canfarotta; Margaret T Dillon; Emily Buss; Harold C Pillsbury; Kevin D Brown; Brendan P O'Connell Journal: Otol Neurotol Date: 2019-09 Impact factor: 2.311
Authors: Philipp Mittmann; I Todt; A Ernst; G Rademacher; S Mutze; S Göricke; M Schlamann; R Ramalingam; S Lang; F Christov; D Arweiler-Harbeck Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2016-06-28 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Samuel R Barber; Elliott D Kozin; Aaron K Remenschneider; Sidharth V Puram; Max Smith; Barbara S Herrmann; Mary E Cunnane; M Christian Brown; Daniel J Lee Journal: Ear Hear Date: 2017 Nov/Dec Impact factor: 3.570
Authors: Alexander Mewes; Sebastian Burg; Goetz Brademann; Jan Andreas Dambon; Matthias Hey Journal: BMC Med Educ Date: 2022-05-20 Impact factor: 3.263
Authors: Christopher K Giardina; Michael W Canfarotta; Nicholas J Thompson; Douglas C Fitzpatrick; Sarah E Hodge; Jenna Baker; Brendan P O'Connell Journal: Otol Neurotol Date: 2020-07 Impact factor: 2.619