Volume 6, Issue 4, December 2018, Page: 33-39
Added Value of MDCT in Cochlear Parameters Assessment in Patients with Sensory Neural Hearing Loss Candidates for Cochlear Implantation
Yosrsa Fouad Mohammed Rashad, Department of Radio-diagnosis & Medical Imaging, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt
Rania Essam-El-Dein Mohamed Ali, Department of Radio-diagnosis & Medical Imaging, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt
Mohammed Hisham Ali Hamad, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt
Abdelmonem Nooman Darweesh, Department of Radio-diagnosis & Medical Imaging, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt
Received: Dec. 2, 2018;       Accepted: Dec. 19, 2018;       Published: Jan. 17, 2019
DOI: 10.11648/j.ijmi.20180604.11      View  109      Downloads  21
Abstract
The aim of this study is to detect the variations in cochlear size which may help in selection of the best cochlear implant electrode length and may also influence the insertion depth angles of the electrode arrays. To achieve this goal, 40 patients (21 females and 19 male) were included, their age ranged from 4 to 57 years (mean 24.63±17.30 years), pre- and post-operative non-contrast CT examination of the petrous bone was performed. It showed that, the cochlear distance (diameter A) ranged between 7.10 – 10.10mm (mean 8.53 ± 0.56mm) ,The cochlear duct length ranged between 25.50 – 38.0mm (mean 31.45 ± 2.33mm), postoperative, insertion depth angles ranged between 405 to 500o (mean 450.17±36.77), for advanced bionics, 211.0 – 420.0o (mean 367.56 ± 71.81o) for cochlear nucleus, 371.0 – 520.0o (mean 456.14 ± 61.33o) for Flex 28, and 475.0 – 598.0o (mean 513.06 ± 31.76 o) for Med-El standard electrode, a non-significant correlation was found between the insertion depth angles and the cochlear distance. A statistically significant positive correlation was found between the insertion depth angle and length of the electrode array. Therefore, it is concluded that assessing the cochlear parameters helps to choose the optimal electrode to provide proper cochlear coverage while avoiding insertional trauma.
Keywords
MDCT= Multidetector Computed Tomography, SNHL=Sensorineural Hearing Loss, CDL=Cochlear Duct Length, CD=Cochlear Distance, MPR=Multiplanar Reconstruction, IAC=Internal Auditory Canal
To cite this article
Yosrsa Fouad Mohammed Rashad, Rania Essam-El-Dein Mohamed Ali, Mohammed Hisham Ali Hamad, Abdelmonem Nooman Darweesh, Added Value of MDCT in Cochlear Parameters Assessment in Patients with Sensory Neural Hearing Loss Candidates for Cochlear Implantation, International Journal of Medical Imaging. Vol. 6, No. 4, 2018, pp. 33-39. doi: 10.11648/j.ijmi.20180604.11
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Reference
[1]
Verbist BM. Imaging of sensorineural hearing loss: A pattern-based approach to diseases of the inner ear and cerebellopontine angle. Insights Imaging. 2012;3(2):139-153.
[2]
Miyasaka M, Nosaka S, Morimoto N, et al. CT and MR imaging for pediatric cochlear implantation: Emphasis on the relationship between the cochlear nerve canal and the cochlear nerve. Pediatr Radiol. 2010;40(9):1509-1516.
[3]
Kutz JWJ, Lee KH, Isaacson B, et al. Cochlear implantation in children with cochlear nerve absence or deficiency. Otol Neurotol Off Publ Am Otol Soc Am Neurotol Soc [and] Eur Acad Otol Neurotol. 2011;32(6):956-961.
[4]
Kisser U, Ertl-Wagner B, Hempel JM, et al. High-resolution computed tomography-based length assessments of the cochlea--an accuracy evaluation. Acta Otolaryngol. 2014;134(10):1011-1015.
[5]
Lee CH, Goo JM, Ye HJ, et al. Radiation dose modulation techniques in the multidetector CT era: from basics to practice. Radiographics. 2008;28(5):1451-1459.
[6]
Joshi VM, Navlekar SK, Kishore Gr et al. CT and MR Imaging of the Inner Ear and Brain in Children with Congenital Sensorineural Hearing Loss. RadioGraphics: 2012;32(3):683–698.
[7]
Koch RW, Ladak HM, Elfarnawany M, et al. Measuring Cochlear Duct Length - A historical analysis of methods and results. J Otolaryngol - Head Neck Surg. 2017;46(1):1-11.
[8]
Nayak G, Panda NK, Banumathy N, et al. Deeper insertion of electrode array result in better rehabilitation outcomes - Do we have evidence? Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2016;82:47-53.
[9]
Lee J, Nadol JB and Eddington DK. Depth of electrode insertion and postoperative performance in humans with cochlear implants: A histopathologic study. Audiol Neurotol. 2010;15(5):323-331.
[10]
Rivas A, Cakir A, Hunter JB, et al. Automatic Cochlear Duct Length Estimation for Selection of Cochlear Implant Electrode Arrays. Otol Neurotol. 2017;38(3):339-346.
[11]
Adunka O, Unkelbach MH, Mack MG, et al.Predicting basal cochlear length for electric-acoustic stimulation. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2005;131(6):488-492.
[12]
Chaturvedi A, Mohan C, Mahajan S, et al. Imaging of cochlear implants. Indian J Radiol Imaging. 2006;16(3):385-392.
[13]
Kuthubutheen J, Grewal A, Symons S, et al. The effect of cochlear duct length on hearing outcomes in hearing preservation cochlear implantation Methods.Sunnybrook health sciences center .2014;35(1):3.
[14]
Grover, M., Sharma, S., Singh, S.N. et al. Measuring cochlear duct length in Asian population: worth giving a thought. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol .2018 ; 275(3):725-728
[15]
Meng J, Li S, Zhang F, et al. Cochlear Size and Shape Variability and Implications in Cochlear Implantation Surgery. Otol Neurotol Off Publ Am Otol Soc Am Neurotol Soc [and] Eur Acad Otol Neurotol. 2016;37(9):1307-1313.
[16]
Würfel W, Lanfermann H, Lenarz T, et al. Cochlear length determination using Cone Beam Computed Tomography in a clinical setting. Hear Res. 2014;316 :65-72.
[17]
Escudé B, James C, Deguine O, et al. The size of the cochlea and predictions of insertion depth angles for cochlear implant electrodes. Audiol Neurotol. 2006;11(SUPPL. 1):27-33.
[18]
Franke-Trieger A and Mürbe D. Estimation of insertion depth angle based on cochlea diameter and linear insertion depth: a prediction tool for the CI422. Eur Arch Oto-Rhino-Laryngology. 2015;272(11):3193-3199.
[19]
Franke-Trieger A, Jolly C, Darbinjan A, et al. Insertion depth angles of cochlear implant arrays with varying length: A temporal bone study. Otol Neurotol. 2014;35(1):58-63.
Browse journals by subject