Preoperative angular insertion depth prediction in case of lateral wall cochlear implant electrode arrays

Author(s):  
Mohammad Mahmudur Rahman Khan ◽  
Robert F. Labadie ◽  
Jack H. Noble
2021 ◽  
pp. 019459982098745
Author(s):  
Michael W. Canfarotta ◽  
Margaret T. Dillon ◽  
Kevin D. Brown ◽  
Harold C. Pillsbury ◽  
Matthew M. Dedmon ◽  
...  

Objective High rates of partial insertion have been reported for cochlear implant (CI) recipients of long lateral wall electrode arrays, presumably caused by resistance encountered during insertion due to cochlear morphology. With recent advances in long-electrode array design, we sought to investigate (1) the incidence of complete insertions among patients implanted with 31.5-mm flexible arrays and (2) whether complete insertion is limited by cochlear duct length (CDL). Study Design Retrospective review. Setting Tertiary referral center. Methods Fifty-one adult CI recipients implanted with 31.5-mm flexible lateral wall arrays underwent postoperative computed tomography to determine the rate of complete insertion, defined as all contacts being intracochlear. CDL and angular insertion depth (AID) were compared between complete and partial insertion cohorts. Results Most cases had a complete insertion (96.1%, n = 49). Among the complete insertion cohort, the median CDL was 33.6 mm (range, 30.3-37.9 mm), and median AID was 641° (range, 533-751°). Two cases of partial insertion had relatively short CDL (31.8 mm and 32.3 mm) and shallow AID (542° and 575°). Relatively shallow AID for the 2 cases of partial insertion fails to support the idea that CDL alone prevents a complete insertion. Conclusion Complete insertion of a 31.5-mm flexible array is feasible in most cases and does not appear to be limited by the range of CDL observed in this cohort. Future studies are needed to estimate other variations in cochlear morphology that could predict resistance and failure to achieve complete insertion with long arrays.


2015 ◽  
Vol 20 (6) ◽  
pp. 349-353 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philipp Mittmann ◽  
Grit Rademacher ◽  
Sven Mutze ◽  
Arneborg Ernst ◽  
Ingo Todt

Migration of a cochlear implant electrode is a hitherto uncommon complication. So far, array migration has only been observed in lateral wall electrodes. Between 1999 and 2014, a total of 27 patients received bilateral perimodiolar electrode arrays at our institution. The insertion depth angle was estimated on the initial postoperative scans and compared with the insertion depth angle of the postoperative scans performed after contralateral cochlear implantation. Seven (25.93%) patients were found to have an electrode array migration of more than 15°. Electrode migration in perimodiolar electrodes seems to be less frequent and to occur to a lower extent than in lateral wall electrodes. Electrode migration was clinically asymptomatic in all cases.


2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Cameron M. Hendricks ◽  
Matt S. Cavilla ◽  
David E. Usevitch ◽  
Trevor L. Bruns ◽  
Katherine E. Riojas ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 132 (3) ◽  
pp. 224-229 ◽  
Author(s):  
P Mittmann ◽  
A Ernst ◽  
I Todt

AbstractBackground:Preservation of residual hearing is one of the major goals in modern cochlear implant surgery. Intra-cochlear fluid pressure changes influence residual hearing, and should be kept low before, during and after cochlear implant insertion.Methods:Experiments were performed in an artificial cochlear model. A pressure sensor was inserted in the apical part. Five insertions were performed on two electrode arrays. Each insertion was divided into three parts, and statistically evaluated in terms of pressure peak frequency and pressure peak amplitude.Results:The peak frequency over each third part of the electrode increased in both electrode arrays. A slight increase was seen in peak amplitude in the lateral wall electrode array, but not in the midscalar electrode array. Significant differences were found in the first third of both electrode arrays.Conclusion:The midscalar and lateral wall electrode arrays have different intra-cochlear fluid pressure changes associated with intra-cochlear placement, electrode characteristics and insertion.


2021 ◽  
pp. 019459982110363
Author(s):  
Margaret E. MacPhail ◽  
Nathan T. Connell ◽  
Douglas J. Totten ◽  
Mitchell T. Gray ◽  
David Pisoni ◽  
...  

Objective To compare differences in audiologic outcomes between slim modiolar electrode (SME) CI532 and slim lateral wall electrode (SLW) CI522 cochlear implant recipients. Study Design Retrospective cohort study. Setting Tertiary academic hospital. Methods Comparison of postoperative AzBio sentence scores in quiet (percentage correct) in adult cochlear implant recipients with SME or SLW matched for preoperative AzBio sentence scores in quiet and aided and unaided pure tone average. Results Patients with SLW (n = 52) and patients with SME (n = 37) had a similar mean (SD) age (62.0 [18.2] vs 62.6 [14.6] years, respectively), mean preoperative aided pure tone average (55.9 [20.4] vs 58.1 [16.4] dB; P = .59), and mean AzBio score (percentage correct, 11.1% [13.3%] vs 8.0% [11.5%]; P = .25). At last follow-up (SLW vs SME, 9.0 [2.9] vs 9.9 [2.6] months), postoperative mean AzBio scores in quiet were not significantly different (percentage correct, 70.8% [21.3%] vs 65.6% [24.5%]; P = .29), and data log usage was similar (12.9 [4.0] vs 11.3 [4.1] hours; P = .07). In patients with preoperative AzBio <10% correct, the 6-month mean AzBio scores were significantly better with SLW than SME (percentage correct, 70.6% [22.9%] vs 53.9% [30.3%]; P = .02). The intraoperative tip rollover rate was 8% for SME and 0% for SLW. Conclusions Cochlear implantation with SLW and SME provides comparable improvement in audiologic functioning. SME does not exhibit superior speech recognition outcomes when compared with SLW.


2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (02) ◽  
pp. 51-55
Author(s):  
Holger Sudhoff ◽  
Conrad Riemann ◽  
Hans Björn Gehl ◽  
Ingo Todt

Abstract Introduction Recent developments regarding cochlear implant magnets (e.g., a bipolar diametral magnet) and refined surgical technique (e.g., implant positioning) have made a significant impact on the relation between a cochlear implant and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). MRI scanning has changed from a contraindication to a diagnostic tool. For the first time, a pain-free in vivo evaluation of the cochlea’s fluid state, following the insertion of an electrode, has become possible via MRI scanning. The aim of this study was to evaluate various cochlear implant electrodes’ MRI-specific patterns. Materials and Methods In a retrospective study, we evaluated the MRI pattern of casting iron (CI) electrodes in a 3T T2 turbo spin echo (TSE) sequence after a surgery with Medel Flex 28, Flex 24, AB HFMS, and MRI at 1.5 T T2 TSE with the Oticon EVO array. Results A generally different axial MRI pattern between the “lateral wall” electrodes and the “modiolar” electrodes at the basal turn could be observed. A difference in terms of electrode length/insertion depth could not be found at the present scan resolution. Electrode contacts have an impact on the MRI signal-diminishing pattern. Conclusion At T2 sequences, an electrode design-specific MRI pattern can be observed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document