E H Stefanescu1, S Motoi2. 1. Department of ENT,Faculty of Medicine,'Victor Babes' University of Medicine and Pharmacy,Timisoara,Romania. 2. Department of Radiology,Faculty of Medicine,'Victor Babes' University of Medicine and Pharmacy,Timisoara,Romania.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the usefulness and reliability of a research software application for the estimation of an individual's cochlear duct length as a basis for electrode selection. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, 21 consecutive patients (23 ears) implanted with a cochlear electrode were investigated. The study comprised 19 children (2 bilateral) and 2 adults. RESULTS: The measured 'A' distances (the largest distance from the round window to the contralateral wall) corresponded to cochlear duct lengths of 28.5-36.4 mm. The mean cochlear duct length was 34.05 ± 1.72 mm (33.60 ± 2.27 mm in females and 34.35 ± 1.27 mm in males). Full insertion was achieved in all but two cases. No misplaced electrode array or electrode fold-over was detected. In all but three ears, the electrode was chosen based on the research software application's indication. CONCLUSION: The results show a good correlation between the pre-operatively predicted insertion depths using the software application and those post-operatively measured using X-ray. The insertion length predicted by the software was always longer than that measured via X-ray.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the usefulness and reliability of a research software application for the estimation of an individual's cochlear duct length as a basis for electrode selection. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, 21 consecutive patients (23 ears) implanted with a cochlear electrode were investigated. The study comprised 19 children (2 bilateral) and 2 adults. RESULTS: The measured 'A' distances (the largest distance from the round window to the contralateral wall) corresponded to cochlear duct lengths of 28.5-36.4 mm. The mean cochlear duct length was 34.05 ± 1.72 mm (33.60 ± 2.27 mm in females and 34.35 ± 1.27 mm in males). Full insertion was achieved in all but two cases. No misplaced electrode array or electrode fold-over was detected. In all but three ears, the electrode was chosen based on the research software application's indication. CONCLUSION: The results show a good correlation between the pre-operatively predicted insertion depths using the software application and those post-operatively measured using X-ray. The insertion length predicted by the software was always longer than that measured via X-ray.