Comparing linear and non-linear models to estimate the appropriate cochlear implant electrode array length-are current methods precise enough?

被引:4
作者
Weiss, Nora M. M. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Breitsprecher, Tabita [1 ]
Wozniak, Martin [4 ]
Baechinger, David [1 ]
Voelter, Christiane [1 ]
Mlynski, Robert [5 ]
van de Heyning, Paul [2 ,6 ]
Van Rompaey, Vincent [2 ,6 ]
Dazert, Stefan [1 ]
机构
[1] Ruhr Univ Bochum, St Elisabeth Hosp Bochum, Dept Otorhinolaryngol Head & Neck Surg, Bochum, Germany
[2] Univ Antwerp, Fac Med & Hlth Sci, Dept Translat Neurosci, Antwerp, Belgium
[3] Ruhr Univ Bochum, Int Grad Sch Neurosci IGSN, Bochum, Germany
[4] MED EL Elektromed Gerate Deutschland GmbH, Starnberg, Germany
[5] Univ Rostock, Dept Otorhinolaryngol Head & Neck Surg Otto Korner, Rostock, Germany
[6] Antwerp Univ Hosp, Dept Otorhinolaryngol & Head & Neck Surg, Antwerp, Belgium
关键词
Angular insertion depth prediction; Insertion angle; INSERTION DEPTH; RECOGNITION; OUTCOMES;
D O I
10.1007/s00405-023-08064-z
中图分类号
R76 [耳鼻咽喉科学];
学科分类号
100213 ;
摘要
PurposeIn cochlear implantation with flexible lateral wall electrode arrays, a cochlear coverage (CC) range between 70% and 80% is considered ideal for optimal speech perception. To achieve this CC, the cochlear implant (CI) electrode array has to be chosen according to the individual cochlear duct length (CDL). Here, we mathematically analyzed the suitability of different flexible lateral wall electrode array lengths covering between 70% and 80% of the CDL.MethodsIn a retrospective cross-sectional study preoperative high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) from patients undergoing cochlear implantation was investigated. The CDL was estimated using an otosurgical planning software and the CI electrode array lengths covering 70-80% of the CDL was calculated using (i) linear and (ii) non-linear models.ResultsThe analysis of 120 HRCT data sets showed significantly different model-dependent CDL. Significant differences between the CC of 70% assessed from linear and non-linear models (mean difference: 2.5 mm, p < 0.001) and the CC of 80% assessed from linear and non-linear models (mean difference: 1.5 mm, p < 0.001) were found. In up to 25% of the patients none of the existing flexible lateral wall electrode arrays fit into this range. In 59 cases (49,2%) the models did not agree on the suitable electrode arrays.ConclusionsThe CC varies depending on the underlying CDL approximation, which critically influences electrode array choice. Based on the literature, we hypothesize that the non-linear method systematically overestimates the CC and may lead to rather too short electrode array choices. Future studies need to assess the accuracy of the individual mathematical models.
引用
收藏
页码:43 / 49
页数:7
相关论文
共 33 条
[1]   Cochlear Implant Insertion Depth Prediction: A Temporal Bone Accuracy Study [J].
Anschuetz, Lukas ;
Weder, Stefan ;
Mantokoudis, Georgios ;
Kompis, Martin ;
Caversaccio, Marco ;
Wimmer, Wilhelm .
OTOLOGY & NEUROTOLOGY, 2018, 39 (10) :E996-E1001
[2]   On the Accuracy of Clinical Insertion Angle Predictions With a Surgical Planning Platform for Cochlear Implantation [J].
Avallone, Emilio ;
Lenarz, Thomas ;
Timm, Max E. .
OTOLOGY & NEUROTOLOGY, 2021, 42 (09) :E1242-E1249
[3]  
Brant Jason A, 2016, World J Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg, V2, P157, DOI 10.1016/j.wjorl.2016.08.002
[4]   CT imaging-based approaches to cochlear duct length estimation-a human temporal bone study [J].
Breitsprecher, Tabita ;
Dhanasingh, Anandhan ;
Schulze, Marko ;
Kipp, Markus ;
Dakah, Rami Abu ;
Oberhoffner, Tobias ;
Dau, Michael ;
Frerich, Bernhard ;
Weber, Marc-Andre ;
Langner, Soenke ;
Mlynski, Robert ;
Weiss, Nora M. .
EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2022, 32 (02) :1014-1023
[5]   Investigation of the effect of cochlear implant electrode length on speech comprehension in quiet and noise compared with the results with users of electro-acoustic-stimulation, a retrospective analysis [J].
Buechner, Andreas ;
Illg, Angelika ;
Majdani, Omid ;
Lenarz, Thomas .
PLOS ONE, 2017, 12 (05)
[6]   Insertion Depth and Cochlear Implant Speech Recognition Outcomes: A Comparative Study of 28-and 31.5-mm Lateral Wall Arrays [J].
Canfarotta, Michael W. ;
Dillon, Margaret T. ;
Brown, Kevin D. ;
Pillsbury, Harold C. ;
Dedmon, Matthew M. ;
O'Connell, Brendan P. .
OTOLOGY & NEUROTOLOGY, 2022, 43 (02) :183-189
[7]   Long-TermInfluence of Electrode Array Length on Speech Recognition in Cochlear Implant Users [J].
Canfarotta, Michael W. ;
Dillon, Margaret T. ;
Buchman, Craig A. ;
Buss, Emily ;
O'Connell, Brendan P. ;
Rooth, Meredith A. ;
King, English R. ;
Pillsbury, Harold C. ;
Adunka, Oliver F. ;
Brown, Kevin D. .
LARYNGOSCOPE, 2021, 131 (04) :892-897
[8]   Literature Review on the Distribution of Spiral Ganglion Cell Bodies inside the Human Cochlear Central Modiolar Trunk [J].
Dhanasingh, Anandhan ;
Jolly, Claude N. ;
Rajan, Gunesh ;
van de Heyning, Paul .
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ADVANCED OTOLOGY, 2020, 16 (01) :104-110
[9]  
Dhanasingh Anandhan, 2019, World J Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg, V5, P117, DOI 10.1016/j.wjorl.2018.09.004
[10]   An overview of cochlear implant electrode array designse [J].
Dhanasingh, Anandhan ;
Jolly, Claude .
HEARING RESEARCH, 2017, 356 :93-103