Abstract

ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to examine electrode array coverage, scalar position and dislocation rate in straight electrode arrays with special focus on a new electrode array with 26 mm in lengths.Study designRetrospective study.SettingTertiary academic center.Patients201 ears implanted between 2013 and 2019.Main outcome measuresWe conducted a comparative analysis of patients implanted with lateral wall electrode arrays of different lengths (F24 = MED-EL Flex24, F26 = MED-EL Flex26, F28 = MED-EL Flex28 and F31.5 = MED-EL FlexSoft). Cone beam computed tomography was used to determine electrode array position (scala tympani (ST) versus scala vestibuli (SV), intracochlear dislocation, position of dislocation and insertion angle).ResultsStudy groups show no significant differences regarding cochlear size which excludes influences by cochlear morphology. As expected, the F24 showed significant shorter insertion angles compared to the longer electrode arrays. The F26 electrode array showed no signs of dislocation or SV insertion. The electrode array with the highest rate of ST dislocations was the F31.5 (26.3%). The electrode array with the highest rates of SV insertions was the F28 (5.75%). Most of the included electrode arrays dislocate between 320° and 360° (mean: 346.4°; range from 166° to 502°).ConclusionThe shorter F24 and the new straight electrode array F26 show less or no signs of scalar dislocation, neither for round window nor for cochleostomy insertion than the longer F28 and the F31.5 array. As expected, the cochlear coverage is increasing with length of the electrode array itself but with growing risk for scalar dislocation and with the highest rates of dislocation for the longest electrode array F31.5. Position of intracochlear dislocation is in the apical cochlear part in the included lateral wall electrode arrays.

Highlights

  • All manufacturers diversify their electrode array portfolio more and more regarding shape, size, diameter and flexibility to enable the personalized choice of the implant

  • The aim of this study is to evaluate retrospectively the new lateral wall (LW) electrode array (­Flex26, MED-EL = F26) regarding scalar dislocation rate and electrode coverage compared to other LW electrode arrays with different electrode array lengths of the same manufacturer in correlation to cochlear size ­(Flex24 = F24, ­Flex28 = F28 and the ­FlexSoft = F31.5; MED-EL G.m.b.H

  • No significant difference in cochlear size was detected between our four defined electrode array groups, so that eventually there is no influence of the cochlear morphology on the described cochlear coverage

Read more

Summary

Introduction

All manufacturers diversify their electrode array portfolio more and more regarding shape, size, diameter and flexibility to enable the personalized choice of the implant. The relationship between cochlear morphology, electrode array position and postoperative speech discrimination is of increasing interest. European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology (2021) 278:3707–3714 analyzed 403 ears in CB-CT inserted with a ­Cochlear® Contour ­Advance® electrode array (Cochlear Ltd., Lane Cove, Australia) and described that the electrode array was more likely to dislocate within cochleae with smaller height and smaller diameter. A newly developed slim precurved electrode array demonstrated 0% dislocation in both temporal bone studies and human implantation [1]. As already known for precurved electrode arrays, Wanna et al [45] stated that for LW electrode arrays an electrode position entirely within the ST leads to superior audiological outcomes

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
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 call