Jiseon Oh1, Jung-Eun Cheon2,3, Junghoan Park1, Young Hun Choi1,4, Yeon Jin Cho1,4, Seunghyun Lee1,4, Seung Ha Oh5, Su-Mi Shin6, Sun-Won Park6. 1. Department of Radiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, 101 Daehak-ro, Jongro-gu, Seoul, 03080, South Korea. 2. Department of Radiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, 101 Daehak-ro, Jongro-gu, Seoul, 03080, South Korea. cheonje@snu.ac.kr. 3. Institute of Radiation Medicine, SNUMRC (Seoul National University Medical Research Center), Seoul, South Korea. cheonje@snu.ac.kr. 4. Institute of Radiation Medicine, SNUMRC (Seoul National University Medical Research Center), Seoul, South Korea. 5. Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea. 6. Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Seoul Metropolitan Government Boramae Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Preoperative estimation of the insertion depth angle of cochlear implant (CI) electrodes is essential for surgical planning. The purpose of this study was to determine the cochlear size using preoperative CT and to investigate the correlation between cochlear size and insertion depth angle in morphologically normal cochlea. METHODS: Thirty-five children who underwent CI were included in this study. Cochlear duct length (CDL) and the diameter of the cochlear basal turn (distance A/B) on preoperative CT and the insertion depth angle of the CI electrode on postoperative radiographs were independently measured by two readers. Correlation between cochlear size and insertion depth angle was evaluated. Interobserver agreement was calculated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS: The mean CDL, distance A, and distance B of 70 ears were 36.20 ± 1.57 mm, 8.67 ± 0.42 mm, and 5.73 ± 0.32 mm, respectively. The mean insertion depth angle was 431.45 ± 38.42°. Interobserver agreements of CDL, distance A/B, and insertion depth angle were fair to excellent (ICC 0.864, 0.862, 0.529, and 0.958, respectively). Distance A (r = - 0.7643) and distance B (r = - 0.7118) showed a negative correlation with insertion depth angle, respectively (p < 0.0001). However, the correlation between CDL and insertion depth angle was not statistically significant (r = - 0.2333, p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The CDL and cochlear distance can be reliably obtained from preoperative CT. Distance A can be used as a predictive marker for estimating insertion depth angle during CI surgery.
OBJECTIVES: Preoperative estimation of the insertion depth angle of cochlear implant (CI) electrodes is essential for surgical planning. The purpose of this study was to determine the cochlear size using preoperative CT and to investigate the correlation between cochlear size and insertion depth angle in morphologically normal cochlea. METHODS: Thirty-five children who underwent CI were included in this study. Cochlear duct length (CDL) and the diameter of the cochlear basal turn (distance A/B) on preoperative CT and the insertion depth angle of the CI electrode on postoperative radiographs were independently measured by two readers. Correlation between cochlear size and insertion depth angle was evaluated. Interobserver agreement was calculated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS: The mean CDL, distance A, and distance B of 70 ears were 36.20 ± 1.57 mm, 8.67 ± 0.42 mm, and 5.73 ± 0.32 mm, respectively. The mean insertion depth angle was 431.45 ± 38.42°. Interobserver agreements of CDL, distance A/B, and insertion depth angle were fair to excellent (ICC 0.864, 0.862, 0.529, and 0.958, respectively). Distance A (r = - 0.7643) and distance B (r = - 0.7118) showed a negative correlation with insertion depth angle, respectively (p < 0.0001). However, the correlation between CDL and insertion depth angle was not statistically significant (r = - 0.2333, p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The CDL and cochlear distance can be reliably obtained from preoperative CT. Distance A can be used as a predictive marker for estimating insertion depth angle during CI surgery.
Authors: Ingeborg Hochmair; Wolfgang Arnold; Peter Nopp; Claude Jolly; Joachim Müller; Peter Roland Journal: Acta Otolaryngol Date: 2003-06 Impact factor: 1.494
Authors: Tabita Breitsprecher; Anandhan Dhanasingh; Marko Schulze; Markus Kipp; Rami Abu Dakah; Tobias Oberhoffner; Michael Dau; Bernhard Frerich; Marc-André Weber; Soenke Langner; Robert Mlynski; Nora M Weiss Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2021-08-31 Impact factor: 5.315