Cross-sectional Area Of Cochlear Nerve Research Articles

Comparison of Two Measurement Paradigms to Determine Electrically Evoked Cochlear Nerve Responses and Their Correlation to Cochlear Nerve Cross-section in Infants and Young Children With Cochlear Implant.

Electrically evoked compound action potentials (ECAPs) are used for intra-/postoperative monitoring with intracochlear stimulation of cochlear implants. ECAPs are recorded in MED-EL (Innsbruck, Austria) implants using auditory response telemetry (ART), which has been further developed with automatic threshold determination as AutoART. The success of an ECAP measurement also depends on the number of available spiral ganglion cells and the bipolar neurons of the cochlear nerve (CN). It is assumed that a higher population of spiral ganglion cell implies a larger CN cross-sectional area (CSA), which consequently affects ECAP measurements. Intraoperative ECAP measurements from 19 implanted ears of children aged 8 to 18 months were retrospectively evaluated. A comparison and correlation of ART/AutoART ECAP thresholds/slopes at electrodes E2 (apical), E6 (medial), E10 (basal), and averaged E1 to E12 with CN CSA on magnetic resonance imaging was performed. A Pearson correlation of the ART/AutoART ECAP thresholds/slopes for E2/E6/E10 and the averaged electrodes E1 to E12 showed a significant correlation. The CN CSA did not correlate significantly with the averaged ART/AutoART ECAP thresholds/slopes across all 12 electrodes. AutoART provides reliable measurements and is therefore a suitable alternative to ART. No significant influence of CN CSA on ECAP thresholds/slopes was observed. A predictive evaluation of the success of ECAP measurements based on CN CSA for a clinical setting cannot be made according to the present data.

ART and AutoART ECAP measurements and cochlear nerve anatomy as predictors in adult cochlear implant recipients.

The purpose of this retrospective study is to compare the results of electrically evoked compound action potential (ECAP) measurements using automatic auditory response telemetry (AutoART) with those obtained by ART in adults. The study also aimed to evaluate the predictive value of intraoperative ART and AutoART ECAPs for speech intelligibility (SI) and hearing success (HS), and to determine if cochlear nerve (CN) cross-sectional area (CSA) obtained preoperatively by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans could predict ART and AutoART ECAPs and SI and HS outcome. The study analyzed and correlated ART and AutoART ECAP thresholds at electrodes E2, E6, and E10, as well as averaged ECAP thresholds over electrodes E1-E12, using data from 32 implants. Correlations were also examined for ART and AutoART ECAP slopes. In addition, averaged ART and AutoART ECAP thresholds and slopes over all 12 electrodes for each participant were correlated with CN CSA measured from MRI sequences. SI of the monosyllabic Freiburg Speech Test at 65 dB sound pressure level was examined along with averaged ART and AutoART thresholds and slopes over all 12 electrodes. A parallel analysis was performed for HS, derived from the difference between baseline and 6-month SI. Finally, correlations between CN CSA and SI, as well as CN CSA and HS were examined. The results of the study showed a significant positive correlation between ART and AutoART ECAP thresholds and as well as slopes for E2, E6, E10 and averaged thresholds and slopes of E1-E12. However, no significant correlation was observed between ART and AutoART averaged ECAP thresholds and slopes and either SI and HS or CN CSA. Furthermore, no significant correlation was found between CN CSA and SI and HS. While AutoART is a reliable and safe program for measuring ECAPs in adults, the study found no preoperative prognostic information on intraoperative ECAP results using parameters extracted from current MRI sequences or pre-/intraoperative information on subsequent hearing outcome using ECAP and CN CSA.

An Evaluation of the Relationship between Retinal Nerve Fiber Thickness, Cochlear Nerve Thickness, the Level of Tinnitus, and Hearing Loss in Unilateral Tinnitus Patients

Background: In this study, optic coherence tomography (OCT) examination was performed to check whether there was any interaction between ophthalmic axonal structures in unilateral tinnitus patients, and the relationship between optic nerve thickness and cochlear nerve thickness was evaluated. Objective: The aim of the study was to evaluate the relatioship between hearing loss, tinnitus, and nerve thicknesses. Study Design: Prospective study. Setting: Tertiary referral university hospital. Patients: The study included 88 patients with unilateral tinnitus, for which no organic cause could be found in physical examination, psychiatric evaluation, or with imaging methods. Study groups were formed of the tinnitus side and control groups were formed of the healthy side as follows: Group 1 (Non-tinnitus side normal hearing values – n = 30), Group 2 (non-tinnitus side minimal hearing loss – n = 27), Group 3 (non-tinnitus side moderate hearing loss – n = 31), Group 4 (tinnitus side normal hearing values – n = 25), Group 5 (tinnitus side minimal hearing loss – n = 25), and Group 6 (tinnitus side moderate hearing loss – n = 38). Intervention: Retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness was evaluated with OCT, and the cochlear nerve cross-sectional area was evaluated with MRI. Main Outcome Measures: RNFL measurements were taken with OCT from the subfoveal area (RNFL-SF) and 1.5 mm temporal to the fovea (RNFL-T µm) and nasal (RNFL-N µm) sectors. On MRI, 3 measurements were taken along the nerve from the cerebellopontine angle as far as the internal auditory canal, and the mean value of these 3 measurements was calculated. Results: When the groups were evaluated in respect of cochlear nerve thickness, a significant difference was seen between Group 1 and both the groups with hearing loss and the tinnitus groups. In the subgroup analysis, a statistically significant difference was determined between Group 1 and Groups 3, 4, 5, and 6 (p = 0.013, p = 0.003, p < 0.001, and p < 0.001, respectively). When the groups were evaluated in respect of the RNFL-SF (µm), RNFL-T (µm), and RNFL-N (µm) values, the differences were determined to be statistically significant (p < 0.001 for all). In the correlation analysis, a negative correlation was determined between hearing loss and cochlear nerve diameter (r: −0.184, p = 0.014), and RNFL-N (r: −0.272, p < 0.001) and between tinnitus and cochlear nerve diameter (r: −0.536, p < 0.001), and RNFL-T (r: −0.222, p < 0.009). Conclusion: The study results clearly showed a relationship between cochlear nerve fiber thickness and hearing loss and the severity of tinnitus in cases with unilateral tinnitus and that there could be neurodegenerative factors in the disease etiology. A similar relationship seen with the RNFL supports the study hypothesis.

Does size of the cochlear nerve affect postoperative auditory performance in pediatric cochlear implant patients with normal cochlear nerves?

IntroductionCochlear implantation is an effective treatment method for severe to profound hearing loss. Many factors that may influence cochlear implantation success have been explained in previous studies. Apart from those, minor differences in size of normal cochlear nerves may affect postoperative performance. ObjectiveTo investigate whether the minor differences in cochlear nerve size in normal cochlear nerves affect postoperative cochlear implant performance. Methods30 pediatric prelingually deaf patients who were treated with cochlear implantation were included in this study. From the reconstructed parasagittal magnetic resonance images, the diameter and cross-sectional area of the cochlear nerve on the ipsilateral and contralateral side were measured. Auditory evaluations were performed 1, 3, 6 and 12 months following the first fitting. All the analysis was performed by using EARS®, evaluation of auditory responses to speech tool. Correlation between cochlear nerve diameter, cross-sectional area and postoperative auditory perception was analyzed to determine whether variation in cochlear nerve size contributes to postoperative auditory performance. ResultsThe mean diameter of the cochlear nerve on the ipsilateral side was 718.4 μm (504.5 − 904.3 μm) and mean cross sectional area was 0.015 cm2 (0.012 − 0.018 cm2). On the contralateral side the mean cochlear nerve diameter was 714.4 μm (502.6 − 951.4 μm) and mean cross sectional area was 0.014 cm2 (0.011 − 0.019 cm2). The correlation between the diameter and cross-sectional area of the ipsilateral and contralateral cochlear nerve revealed no significance. Mean score at first month monosyllable-trochee-polysyllable test, MTP1, was 0.17 (0.08 − 0.33), at 6th month with 6 words test, 6th month MTP6 was 0.72 (0.39 − 1.0), at 6th month with 12 words, 6th month MTP 12 was 0.46 (0.17 − 0.75) and at 12th month with 12 words, 12th month MTP12 was 0.73 (0.25 − 1.0). There was no correlation between the monosyllable-trochee-polysyllable test, values at any time with the diameter of the ipsilateral cochlear nerve. However, the first month MTP, 6th month MTP6 and 12th month MTP12 correlated with the cross-sectional area of the ipsilateral cochlear nerve. ConclusionMeasuring the cross sectional area of the normal- appearing cochlear nerve may give important prognostic knowledge on cochlear implant outcomes. In patients with a larger cross sectional area the auditory performance was better and faster. Although normal appearing, slight differences on cross sectional area of the cochlear nerve may affect performance. Measuring the size of the cochlear nerve on parasagittal magnetic resonance images may provide beneficial information on the postoperative rehabilitation process.

Correlation of cochlear nerve cross-sectional area and auditory performance after cochlear implantation in prelingual children with bilateral profound hearing loss

ObjectiveTo assess whether cochlear nerve (CN) cross-sectional area as measured with parasagittal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in prelingual pediatric deaf patients correlates with auditory performance after cochlear implantation. Study designProspective Cohort study. MethodsThirty-two prelingual children with bilateral profound sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) who received unilateral cochlear implant were included in this study. Diameters of CN at Internal auditory canal (IAC) fundus and mid-point of IAC were retrospectively measured on parasagittal images of FIESTA (Fast Imaging Employing Steady-state Acquisition) sequence MRI by two independent observers. Cross-sectional areas [π (Height/2) (Width/2)] were then correlated with post-operative CAPS (Categories of Auditory Performance) and IT-MAIS (Infant-Toddler Meaningful Auditory Integration Scale) scores regularly assessed at 3 monthly intervals post device activation. ResultsThe cochlear nerve was identified in all the 32 patients. Mean cross-sectional areas (CSA) of cochlear nerve were 0.71 ± 0.16 mm2 at IAC fundus and 0.73 ± 0.18 mm2 at mid-point of IAC. The correlation value between CSA at mid-point of IAC and CAPS score at 6 months was 0.271 (p-value- 0.140) and correlation value between CSA at mid-point of IAC and IT-MAIS score at 6 months was 0.282 (p-value- 0.124) which were statistically not significant. ConclusionThere was no significant correlation between the cross-sectional areas of the cochlear nerve on MRI and postoperative auditory scores as measured by CAPS and IT-MAIS scores at six months from the device activation. Hence, we conclude that above an adequate diameter, which can affect the minimum required neurons, the changes in the diameter do not have significant bearing on auditory outcomes after cochlear implantation.

Comparison of manual and computer-assisted measurement of cochlear nerve obtained from magnetic resonance imaging

Objectives: Cochlear implantation of sensorineural hearing loss requires accurate measurement of cochlear nerve (CN). The precise measurement of very small structures can be improved by automated segmentation and measurement. The variability and reproducibility of the computer-assisted measurement were compared with manual measurements. Materials and Methods: The 3D-constructive interference in steady state magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) images of twenty patients who were referred for MRI in the assessment of giddiness/vertigo or fitness for cochlear implant during the period from June 2013 to June 2014 were analyzed. The CN sizes were measured manually by two independent radiologists. The automatic measurements were then performed on the same images, and its correlation and agreement were calculated between automated and manual measurements. Results: The intra-observer correlation coefficients were significantly larger for cross-sectional area (CSA) of CN using automated measurements when compared to manual measurement (intra-observer r: 0.94021 vs. 0.91437). Similarly, the inter-observer correlation for CSA of CN is also higher in automated measurements (inter measurement r: 0.94786 vs. 0.92013). Conclusions: Using computer-assisted CN dimension measurement, the intra- and inter-observer correlation can be improved when compared to manual measurements. The automated measurement can assist the radiologist in eliminating the need for tedious manual tracing and thus, the time and effort for manual segmentation are also significantly reduced.

Evaluation of cochlear nerve diameter and cross-sectional area in ANSD patients by 3.0-Tesla MRI

Conclusions: The size of cochlear nerve (CN) is atrophic in adult auditory neuropathy spectrum disorder (ANSD) patients compared with non-ANSD sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) patients and normal hearing subjects, and CN deficiency is one of the lesions for ANSD patients. Objectives: To evaluate the dimensions of CN in adult ANSD patients on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and confirm the hypothesis that CN deficiency is one of the lesions for ANSD patients. Methods: Medical records and MRI of 24 adult ANSD patients reviewed retrospectively and 20 non-ANSD SNHL and 24 volunteers with normal hearing were recruited as control groups. The long diameter (LD), short diameter (SD), and cross-sectional area (CSA) of CN and facial nerve (FN) were measured. Results: Among the 24 ANSD patients, this study was able to reconstruct and measure the CN of 91.7% (22/24, total 43 ears) of patients and FN of 83.3% (20/24, total 38 ears) of patients. The mean values and standard deviations of LD, SD, and CSA of CN in ANSD patients were 0.65 ± 0.20 mm, 0.44 ± 0.15 mm, and 0.30 ± 0.19 mm2, respectively. They were significantly smaller in ANSD patients than in control groups (p < 0.001).

Differences in Cochlear Nerve Cross‐Sectional Area between Normal Hearing and Postlingually Deafened Patients on MRI

To demonstrate that parasagittal constructive interference in steady state (CISS) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can be used to accurately measure cochlear nerve cross-sectional area and thereby evaluate for statistically significant differences in the cochlear nerve cross-sectional areas of postlingually deafened and normal-hearing adults. Cross-sectional study. Tertiary care medical center. Parasagittal CISS MRIs of postlingually profoundly deafened cochlear implant candidates and normal-hearing patients at a tertiary care academic medical center between 2006 and 2009 were retrospectively identified. Two independent and blinded investigators measured the cochlear nerve height and width and calculated the cross-sectional area [π(H/2)(W/2)] at the fundus of the internal auditory canals. Measurements of both investigators were analyzed for reliability and agreement with an Altman plot, and deafened patient measurements were compared with results of the normal-hearing patients via Wilcoxon rank sum tests. The cochlear nerve cross-sectional area of postlingually deafened patients (mean ± SD = 0.61 ± 0.16 mm(2)) was less than normal-hearing patients (0.94 ± 0.28 mm(2)). The difference was statistically significant (P = .002). There was good agreement between independent observer measurements. Parasagittal CISS MRI can be used to measure the cochlear nerve with good interobserver agreement, and there is a significant difference between the cross-sectional area of postlingually deafened and normal-hearing adults. The cross-sectional area may correlate with residual spiral ganglion cells and provide a prognostic indicator for post-cochlear implant performance, which is the focus of our ongoing research.

Cochlear Nerve Cross-Sectional Area on MRI

Cochlear Nerve Cross-Sectional Area on MRI