Literature DB >> 34718854

Tight modiolar proximity and feasibility of slim modiolar cochlear implant electrode array insertion in diverse etiologies of hearing loss.

Yehree Kim1, Yoonjoong Kim2, Young Seok Kim1, Sang-Yeon Lee3, Byung Yoon Choi4.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To report on our experience with the slim modiolar electrode (SME) especially focusing on the wide range of etiologies including inner ear anomalies, tumors, ossifications, and even revision surgeries.
METHODS: All the cochlear implantation cases performed from June 2018 to September 2019 by a single surgeon was prospectively recruited. The molecular/radiological etiology of hearing loss, intraoperative outcomes, and radiographic studies of cases where the SME was implanted was reviewed to evaluate compatibility of SME for the wide range of etiologies. For cases where SME replaced the other electrode as a revision, audiologic assessment was also made.
RESULTS: Among the 99 ears implanted during the study period, the SME was successfully implanted in 86 ears. These SME cases comprised inner ear anomaly/cochear nerve deficiency (n = 21) including cochlear hypoplasia type IV with the modiolus, intracochlear schwannoma (n = 1), far advanced otosclerosis (n = 1) and 7 revision cases. The SME was successfully used in 7 revision surgeries to replace the existing electrode. Shorter spiral diameter and decreased intracochlear position index for SME was found compared with their previous electrodes. Four out of the 6 patients who received revision implantation showed better speech perception after their surgeries.
CONCLUSION: The SME can be implanted in any cases unless the integrity of the modiolus is totally compromised. Due to its slim design and tight modiolar-hugging feature, good functional outcome can also be anticipated. Additionally, it is suitable for revision surgeries possibly allowing better hearing outcomes which may be attributed to its closer proximity to the modiolus.
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cochlear ossification; Inner ear anomaly; Intralabyrinthine schwannoma; Modiolar proximity; Revision cochlear implantation; Slim modiolar electrode

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34718854     DOI: 10.1007/s00405-021-07150-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol        ISSN: 0937-4477            Impact factor:   2.503


  11 in total

1.  Quality control after insertion of the nucleus contour and contour advance electrode in adults.

Authors:  Antje Aschendorff; Jan Kromeier; Thomas Klenzner; Roland Laszig
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 3.570

2.  Practical model description of peripheral neural excitation in cochlear implant recipients: 2. Spread of the effective stimulation field (ESF), from ECAP and FEA.

Authors:  Lawrence T Cohen
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2008-11-25       Impact factor: 3.208

Review 3.  Optimal electrode design: Straight versus perimodiolar.

Authors:  P Gibson; P Boyd
Journal:  Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis       Date:  2016-05-30       Impact factor: 2.080

4.  Cochlear Hypoplasia Type Four With Anteriorly Displaced Facial Nerve Canal.

Authors:  Levent Sennaroğlu; Münir Demir Bajin; Erim Pamuk; Emel Tahir
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 2.311

5.  Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve: the effect of electrode position on neural excitation.

Authors:  R K Shepherd; S Hatsushika; G M Clark
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1993-03       Impact factor: 3.208

6.  Categories of Auditory Performance.

Authors:  S Archbold; M E Lutman; D H Marshall
Journal:  Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl       Date:  1995-09

7.  Cochlear Implantation in Cochlear Ossification: Retrospective Review of Etiologies, Surgical Considerations, and Auditory Outcomes.

Authors:  Ashish Vashishth; Andrea Fulcheri; Sampath Chandra Prasad; Margherita Bassi; Gianluca Rossi; Antonio Caruso; Mario Sanna
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 2.311

8.  Intraindividual comparison of psychophysical parameters between perimodiolar and lateral-type electrode arrays in patients with bilateral cochlear implants.

Authors:  Junhui Jeong; Minbum Kim; Ji Hye Heo; Mi-Young Bang; Mi Ran Bae; Jungmin Kim; Jae Young Choi
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 2.311

Review 9.  Cochlear implantation in inner ear malformations--a review article.

Authors:  Levent Sennaroglu
Journal:  Cochlear Implants Int       Date:  2009-04-08

10.  Evolution of cochlear implant arrays result in changes in behavioral and physiological responses in children.

Authors:  Arie Gordin; Blake Papsin; Adrian James; Karen Gordon
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 2.311

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.