Cochlear coverage with lateral wall cochlear implant electrode arrays affects post-operative speech recognition

被引:7
|
作者
Weller, Tobias [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Timm, Max Eike [1 ]
Lenarz, Thomas [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Buechner, Andreas [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Hannover Med Sch, Dept Otorhinolaryngol, Hannover, Germany
[2] German Hearing Ctr DHZ, Hannover, Germany
[3] Cluster Excellence Hearing4All, Oldenburg, Germany
来源
PLOS ONE | 2023年 / 18卷 / 07期
关键词
INSERTION DEPTH; WORD RECOGNITION; PERFORMANCE; OUTCOMES; MORPHOLOGY; LOCATION; POSITION; LENGTH;
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0287450
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
ObjectivesThe goal was to investigate the relationship between the insertion angle/cochlear coverage of cochlear implant electrode arrays and post-operative speech recognition scores in a large cohort of patients implanted with lateral wall electrode arrays. MethodsPre- and post-operative cone beam computed tomography scans of 154 ears implanted with lateral wall electrode arrays were evaluated. Traces of lateral wall and electrode arrays were combined into a virtual reconstruction of the implanted cochlea. This reconstruction was used to measure insertion angles and proportional cochlear coverage. Word recognition scores and sentence recognition scores measured 12 months after implantation using electric-only stimulation were used to examine the relationship between cochlear coverage/insertion angle and implantation outcomes. ResultsPost-operative word recognition scores and the difference between post- and pre-operative word recognition scores were positively correlated with both cochlear coverage and insertion angle, however sentence recognition scores were not. A group-wise comparison of word recognition scores revealed that patients with cochlear coverage below 70% performed significantly worse than patients with coverage between 79%-82% (p = 0.003). Performance of patients with coverage above 82% was on average poorer than between 79%-82, although this finding was not statistically significant (p = 0.84). Dividing the cohort into groups based on insertion angle quadrants revealed that word recognition scores were highest above 450 & DEG; insertion angle, sentence recognition scores were highest between 450 & DEG; and 630 & DEG; and the difference between pre- and post-operative word recognition scores was largest between 540 & DEG; and 630 & DEG;, however none of these differences reached statistical significance. ConclusionsThe results of this study show that cochlear coverage has an effect on post-operative word recognition abilities and the benefit patients receive from their implant. Generally, higher coverage led to better outcomes, however there were results indicating that insertion past 82% cochlear coverage may not provide an additional benefit for word recognition. These findings can be useful for choosing the optimal electrode array and thereby improving cochlear implantation outcomes on a patient-individual basis.
引用
收藏
页数:22
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Comparison of speech perception in bimodal cochlear implant patients with respect to the cochlear coverage
    Tobias Rader
    Leonhard Schrank
    Jennifer L. Spiegel
    Pascal Nachtigäller
    Judith E. Spiro
    John-Martin Hempel
    Martin Canis
    Joachim Mueller
    HNO, 2024, 72 : 17 - 24
  • [22] Comparison of speech perception in bimodal cochlear implant patients with respect to the cochlear coverage
    Rader, Tobias
    Schrank, Leonhard
    Spiegel, Jennifer L.
    Nachtigaeller, Pascal
    Spiro, Judith E.
    Hempel, John-Martin
    Canis, Martin
    Mueller, Joachim
    HNO, 2024, 72 (SUPPL 1) : 17 - 24
  • [23] Automatic Cochlear Duct Length Estimation for Selection of Cochlear Implant Electrode Arrays
    Rivas, Alejandro
    Cakir, Ahmet
    Hunter, Jacob B.
    Labadie, Robert F.
    Zuniga, M. Geraldine
    Wanna, George B.
    Dawant, Benoit M.
    Noble, Jack H.
    OTOLOGY & NEUROTOLOGY, 2017, 38 (03) : 339 - 346
  • [24] Speech recognition in elderly cochlear implant recipients
    Pasanisi, E
    Bacciu, A
    Vincenti, V
    Guida, M
    Barbot, A
    Berghenti, MT
    Bacciu, S
    CLINICAL OTOLARYNGOLOGY, 2003, 28 (02): : 154 - 157
  • [25] Electrode discrimination and speech recognition in postlingually deafened adult cochlear implant subjects
    Zwolan, TA
    Collins, LM
    Wakefield, GH
    JOURNAL OF THE ACOUSTICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA, 1997, 102 (06): : 3673 - 3685
  • [26] Atraumaticity Study of 2 Cochlear Implant Electrode Arrays
    Manrique, Manuel
    Picciafuoco, Sebastian
    Manrique, Raquel
    Sanhueza, Ignacio
    Dominguez, Pablo
    Perez, Nicolas
    Luis Zubieta, Jose
    de Abajo, Jorge
    OTOLOGY & NEUROTOLOGY, 2014, 35 (04) : 619 - 628
  • [27] Cochlear Implant Electrode Array Design and Speech Understanding
    Vohra, Varun
    Andresen, Nicholas S.
    Carver, Courtney
    Dunham, Rachel
    Marsiglia, Dawn
    Yeagle, Jenifer
    Della Santina, Charles C.
    Creighton Jr, Francis X.
    Bowditch, Stephen P.
    Sun, Daniel Q.
    OTOLOGY & NEUROTOLOGY, 2024, 45 (02) : 136 - 142
  • [28] In vivo measures of cochlear length and insertion depth of nucleus cochlear implant electrode arrays
    Ketten, DR
    Vannier, MW
    Skinner, MW
    Gates, GA
    Wang, G
    Neely, JG
    ANNALS OF OTOLOGY RHINOLOGY AND LARYNGOLOGY, 1998, 107 (11): : 1 - 16
  • [29] Long-TermInfluence of Electrode Array Length on Speech Recognition in Cochlear Implant Users
    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
  • [30] Dichotic speech recognition by bilateral cochlear implant users
    Mani, A
    Loizou, PC
    Shoup, A
    Roland, P
    Kruger, P
    COCHLEAR IMPLANTS, 2004, 1273 : 466 - 469