Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: This study aims to investigate the changes in the post-op NRT thresholds of two different implant electrodes of the same brandpositioned laterally within the scala tympani, and the pre-modiolar locations, using the same round window approach.Material and Methods: After CI operation NRT measurements conducted at different times on the Nucleus® CI422 nucleus slimstraight and Nucleus® CI24RE electrode types of two different electrode models.Results: The number of patients who received the Nucleus® CI24RE (ST) electrode and the Nucleus® CI422 nucleus slim straightwere 26 (33.3%) and 56 (66.7%), respectively.
📊
Key Findings & Data:NRT values tended to decrease from the basal part of cochlea towards an apex at anytime of evaluation in both types of cochlear implants.Conclusion: There was a difference between Nucleus® CI24RE and Nucleus® CI422 nucleus slim straight groups in terms of NRTthresholds.
Aim: This study aims to investigate the changes in the post-op NRT thresholds of two different implant electrodes of the same brandpositioned laterally within the scala tympani, and the pre-modiolar locations, using the same round window approach.Material and Methods: After CI operation NRT measurements conducted at different times on the Nucleus® CI422 nucleus slimstraight and Nucleus® CI24RE electrode types of two different electrode models.Results: The number of patients who received the Nucleus® CI24RE (ST) electrode and the Nucleus® CI422 nucleus slim straightwere 26 (33.3%) and 56 (66.7%), respectively. NRT values tended to decrease from the basal part of cochlea towards an apex at anytime of evaluation in both types of cochlear implants.Conclusion: There was a difference between Nucleus® CI24RE and Nucleus® CI422 nucleus slim straight groups in terms of NRTthresholds. Nucleus® CI422 nucleus slim straight electrode yielded lower NRT threshold levels.
🔖
Cite This Article
YAZICI, A., DENİZ, H. (2022). The effect of the cochlear implant electrode position on the neural response telemetry results: A prospective clinical trial at a single center. Annals of Medical Research, Cilt: 26 - Sayı: 11, 2557–2561. https://ajindex.com/articles/447134
Briggs RJ, Tykocinski M, Saunders E, et al. Surgical implications of perimodiolar cochlear implant electrode design: avoiding intracochlear damage and scala vestibuli insertion. Cochlear Implants Int 2001; 2: 135-49
Eshraghi AA, Yang NW, Balkany TJ. Comparative Study of Cochlear Damage With Three Perimodiolar Electrode Designs. Laryngoscope 2003;113: 415-9
Finley CC, Holden TA, Holden LK, et al. Role of electrode placement as a contributor to variability in cochlear implant outcomes. Otol Neurotol 2008;29:920-8
Arnoldner C, Helbig S, Wagenblast J, et al. Electric acoustic stimulation in patients with postlingual severe high-frequency hearing loss: clinical experience. Adv Otorhinolaryngol 2010;67:116-24
Skarzynski H, Matusiak M, Lorens A, et al. Preservation of cochlear structures and hearing when using the Nucleus Slim Straight (CI422) electrode in children. J Laryngol Otol 2016;130:332-9
Lenarz T, James C, Cuda D, et al. European multi-centre study of the Nucleus Hybrid L24 cochlear implant. Int J Audiol 2013;52:838-48
Adunka O, Kiefer J. Impact of electrode insertion depth on intracochlear trauma. Otolaryngol Neck Surg 2006;135:374-82
Kiefer J, Gstoettner W, Baumgartner W, et al. Conservation of low-frequency hearing in cochlear implantation. Acta Otolaryngol 2004;124:272-80
Tykocinski M, Cohen LT, Cowan RS. Measurement and analysis of access resistance and polarization impedance in cochlear implant recipients. Otol Neurotol 2005;26:948-56
Xi X, Ji F, Han D, et al. Electrode interaction in cochlear implant recipients: Comparison of straight and contour electrode arrays. Orl 2009;71:228-37
Tanamati LF, Bevilacqua MC, Costa OA. Longitudinal study of the ecap measured in children with cochlear implants. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2009;75:90-6
Leone CA, Mosca F, Grassia R. Temporal changes in impedance of implanted adults for various cochlear segments. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital 2017;37:312-9
Telmesani LM, Said NM. Electrically evoked compound action potential (ECAP) in cochlear implant children: Changes in auditory nerve response in first year of cochlear implant use. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2016;82:28-33
Van Weert S, Stokroos RJ, Rikers MMJG, et al. Effect of peri-modiolar cochlear implant positioning on auditory nerve responses: A neural response telemetry study. Acta Otolaryngol 2005;125:725-31
Venail F, Mura T, Akkari M, et al. Modeling of Auditory Neuron Response Thresholds with Coch