scholarly journals Effectiveness of skull X-RAY to determine cochlear implant insertion depth

Author(s):  
Vinay Fernandes ◽  
Yiqiao Wang ◽  
Robert Yeung ◽  
Sean Symons ◽  
Vincent Lin
2005 ◽  
Vol 132 (5) ◽  
pp. 751-754 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ingo Todt ◽  
Dietmar Basta ◽  
Andreas Eisenschenk ◽  
Arne Ernst

OBJECTIVE: To observe the influence of electrode pull-back after cochlear implant insertion of Nucleus 24 perimodiolar electrodes. STUDY DESIGN: In a prospective intraoperative study, we analyzed the impedances, neural response telemetry responses, and the spread of excitation after cochlear implant electrode insertion and compared these data to those obtained after a subsequent, controlled pull-back of the electrode. Postoperative depth of electrode insertion was controlled by x-ray. SETTING: Tertiary referral center. SUBJECTS: Six patients (4 male, 2 female; 18 to 69 years) were implanted with a Nucleus 24 (RCA) cochlear implant with a perimodiolar electrode. RESULTS: After a controlled pull-back, a significant decrease of the spread of excitation at the stimuli electrodes 5, 10, 15, and a nonsignificant decrease at stimuli electrode 20 compared to the recordings after the primary normal insertion procedure was found. The mean electric compound action potential amplitude was increased with an apical-to-basal tendency. Impedances remained unchanged by the pull-back. Mean insertion depth at the postoperative x-ray control was 372 degrees (± 10.2). CONCLUSION: Controlled cochlear implant electrode pull-back is a novel technique that optimizes objective intraoperative electrophysiological recordings in patients implanted with a Nucleus 24 perimodiolar cochlear implant by a greater approximation of the electrode to the modiolus. (Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2005;132:751-4.)


2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 129-131 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn Spiers ◽  
Tina Cardamone ◽  
John B. Furness ◽  
Jonathan C. M. Clark ◽  
James F. Patrick ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 36 (8) ◽  
pp. 1343-1348 ◽  
Author(s):  
George B. Wanna ◽  
Jack H. Noble ◽  
Rene H. Gifford ◽  
Mary S. Dietrich ◽  
Alex D. Sweeney ◽  
...  

2002 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 187-191 ◽  
Author(s):  
K.-B. Hüttenbrink ◽  
Th. Zahnert ◽  
C. Jolly ◽  
G. Hofmann

2017 ◽  
Vol 158 (2) ◽  
pp. 350-357 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan Carlos Cisneros Lesser ◽  
Rubens de Brito ◽  
Graziela de Souza Queiroz Martins ◽  
Eloisa Maria Mello Santiago Gebrim ◽  
Ricardo Ferreira Bento

Objective To evaluate cochlear trauma after cochlear implant insertion through a middle fossa approach by means of histologic and imaging studies in temporal bones. Study Design Prospective cadaveric study. Setting University-based temporal bone laboratory. Subjects and Methods Twenty fresh-frozen temporal bones were implanted through a middle cranial fossa basal turn cochleostomy. Ten received a straight electrode and 10 a perimodiolar electrode. Samples were fixed in epoxy resin. Computed tomography (CT) scans determined direction, depth of insertion, and the cochleostomy to round window distance. The samples were polished by a microgrinding technique and microscopically visualized to evaluate intracochlear trauma. Descriptive and analytic statistics were performed to compare both groups. Results The CT scan showed intracochlear insertions in every bone, 10 directed to the middle/apical turn and 10 to the basal turn. In the straight electrode group, the average number of inserted electrodes was 12.3 vs 15.1 for the perimodiolar group ( U = 78, P = .0001). The median insertion depth was larger for the perimodiolar group (14.4 mm vs 12.5 mm, U = 66, P = .021). Only 1 nontraumatic insertion was achieved and 14 samples (70%) had important trauma (Eshraghi grades 3 and 4). No differences were identified comparing position or trauma grades for the 2 electrode models or when comparing trauma depending on the direction of insertion. Conclusion The surgical technique allows a proper intracochlear insertion, but it does not guarantee a correct scala tympani position and carries the risk of important trauma to cochlear microstructures.


2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (7) ◽  
pp. 900-910 ◽  
Author(s):  
Floris Heutink ◽  
Simone R. de Rijk ◽  
Berit M. Verbist ◽  
Wendy J. Huinck ◽  
Emmanuel A. M. Mylanus

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlotte Weinmann ◽  
Uwe Baumann ◽  
Martin Leinung ◽  
Timo Stöver ◽  
Silke Helbig

Objective: Vertigo is a common side effect of cochlear implant (CI) treatment. This prospective study examines the incidence of postoperative vertigo over time and aims to analyze influencing factors such as electrode design and insertion angle (IA).Study Design and Setting: This is a prospective study which has been conducted at a tertiary referral center (academic hospital).Patients: A total of 29 adults were enrolled and received a unilateral CI using one of six different electrode carriers, which were categorized into “structure-preserving” (I), “potentially structure-preserving” (II), and “not structure-preserving” (III).Intervention: Subjective vertigo was assessed by questionnaires at five different time-points before up to 6 months after surgery. The participants were divided into four groups depending on the time of the presence of vertigo before and after surgery. Preoperatively and at 6 months postoperatively, a comprehensive vertigo diagnosis consisting of Romberg test, Unterberger test, subjective visual vertical, optokinetic test, video head impulse test, and caloric irrigation test was performed. In addition, the IA was determined, and the patients were divided in two groups (<430°; ≥430°).Main Outcome Measures: The incidence of vertigo after CI surgery (group 1) was reported, as well as the correlation of subjective vertigo with electrode array categories (I–III) and IA.Results: Among the participants, 45.8% experienced new vertigo after implantation. Based on the questionnaire data, a vestibular origin was suspected in 72.7%. The results did not show a significant correlation with subjective vertigo for any of the performed tests. In group 1 with postoperative vertigo, 18% of patients showed conspicuous results in a quantitative analysis of caloric irrigation test despite the fact that the category I or II electrodes were implanted, which are suitable for structure preservation. Average IA was 404° for the overall group and 409° for group 1. There was no statistically significant correlation between IA and perceived vertigo.Conclusions: Though vertigo after CI surgery seems to be a common complication, the test battery used here could not objectify the symptoms. Further studies should clarify whether this is due to the multifactorial cause of vertigo or to the lack of sensitivity of the tests currently in use. The proof of reduced probability for vertigo when using atraumatic electrode carrier was not successful, nor was the proof of a negative influence of the insertion depth.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew J Goupell ◽  
Jack H Noble ◽  
Sandeep A Phatak ◽  
Elizabeth Kolberg ◽  
Miranda Cleary ◽  
...  

Hypothesis: We hypothesized that the bilateral cochlear-implant (BI-CI) users would have a range of interaural insertion-depth mismatch because of different physical placements or characteristics of the arrays, but less than half of electrodes would have less than 75° or 3 mm of interaural insertion-depth mismatch. We also hypothesized that interaural insertion-depth mismatch would be more prevalent nearer the apex, when electrodes were located outside of scala tympani (i.e., possible interaural scalar mismatch), and when the arrays were a mix of pre-curved and straight types. Background: Brainstem neurons in the superior olivary complex are exquisitely sensitive to interaural differences, the cues to sound localization. These binaurally sensitive neurons rely on interaurally place-of-stimulation-matched inputs at the periphery. BI-CI users may have interaural differences in insertion depth and scalar location, causing interaural place-of-stimulation mismatch that impairs binaural abilities. Methods: Insertion depths and scalar locations were calculated from temporal-bone computed-tomography (CT) scans of 107 BI-CI users (27 Advanced Bionics, 62 Cochlear, and 18 Med-El). Each subject had either both pre-curved, both straight, or one of each type of array (mixed). Results: The median interaural insertion-depth mismatch was 23.4° or 1.3 mm. Relatively large interaural insertion-depth mismatch sufficient to disrupt binaural processing occurred for about 15% of electrode pairs [defined as >75° (13.0% of electrode pairs) or >3 mm (19.0% of electrode pairs)]. There was a significant three-way interaction of insertion depth, scalar location, and array type. Interaural insertion-depth mismatch was most prevalent when electrode pairs were more apically located, electrode pairs had interaural scalar mismatch (i.e., one in Scala Tympani, one in Scala Vestibuli), and when the arrays were both pre-curved. Conclusion: Large interaural insertion-depth mismatch can occur in BI-CI users. For new BI-CI users, improved surgical techniques to avoid interaural insertion-depth and scalar mismatch is recommended. For existing BI-CI users with interaural insertion-depth mismatch, interaural alignment of clinical frequency allocation tables by an audiologist might remediate any negative consequences to spatial-hearing abilities.


2015 ◽  
Vol 129 (9) ◽  
pp. 923-927 ◽  
Author(s):  
A M Hassan ◽  
R Patel ◽  
M Redleaf

AbstractObjectives:This paper reports five cases of aberrant cochlear implant electrode array insertion into the vestibular labyrinth. A review of the literature was conducted in order to clarify reasonable preventive and detection strategies and endorse the routine use of intra-operative plain skull X-ray.Methods:The study entailed a clinical case series and literature review. The setting was a tertiary academic referral centre. The following data were evaluated: pre-operative temporal bone computed tomography, operative reports, intra-operative imaging, neural response telemetry/imaging and post-operative imaging.Results:There were no consistent pre-operative risk factors found on computed tomography scans and no reliable intra-operative signs of electrode array misdirection. All misdirections in our case series, and those in the literature, were easily detectable on intra-operative plain film X-ray.Conclusion:These reported cases demonstrate implant misdirection without the surgeon's awareness. Aberrant insertion cannot be anticipated, and neural response telemetry/imaging is not a reliable indicator of misdirection. Routine intra-operative anteroposterior plain X-ray of the head is a reliable indicator of misdirection, and is fast and relatively inexpensive.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document