Abstract
Is cochlear implant (CI) electrode selection for cochleae with an enlarged vestibular aqueduct (EVA) the same as that for patent cochleae with a normal inner ear structure? Preoperative high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) images of 247 ears were assessed retrospectively. The A-value, B-value, and H-value were measured with OTOPLAN, and Bell curves were created to show the distribution. All ears with EVA were re-evaluated using a 3D slicer to confirm whether incomplete partition type II (IP II) existed. The Mann–Whitney U-test was applied to determine a statistically significant difference. After adjustment with the Bonferroni correction method, a p-value ≤ 0.006 was considered significant. In total, 157 ears with patent cochlea and 90 ears with EVA were assessed. Seventy (82%) of the EVA ears had an IP II malformation, and 14 (19%) of these were not detected by CT scan but were later seen through the 3D reconstruction. A significant difference was found for the A value and B value between the patent cochleae and EVA-only and between the patent cochleae and EVA with IP II. Most EVA cases had an IP II malformation. The basal turn of the cochlea may be smaller in EVA cases than in the patent cochleae. Electrode selection should be adjusted accordingly.
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
