Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Objective The objective of this study is to examine the influence of electrode array design on the position of the basal-most electrode in cochlear implant (CI) surgery and therefore the stimulability of the basal cochlea. Specifically, we evaluated the angular insertion depth of the basal-most electrode in perimodiolar and straight electrode arrays in relation to postoperative speech perception. Materials and Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of 495 patients between 2013 and 2018 using the Cochlear™ Contour Advance® (CA), Cochlear™ Slim Straight® (SSA), or Cochlear™ Slim Modiolar® (SMA) electrode arrays, as well as the MED-EL Flex24 (F24), MED-EL Flex28 (F28), and MED-EL FlexSoft (F31.5) electrode arrays. Cochlear size and the position of the basal-most electrode were measured using rotational tomography or cone beam computed tomography, and the results were compared with postoperative speech perception in monosyllables and numbers. Results The straight electrode arrays, specifically the F31.5 (31.5 mm length) and the F28 (28 mm length), exhibited a significantly greater angular insertion depth of the basal-most electrode. No significant correlation was found between cochlear morphology measurements and the position of the basal-most electrode artifact. Cochleostomy-inserted electrode arrays showed a significantly higher insertion depth of the basal-most electrode. Nevertheless, the position of the basal-most electrode did not have a significant impact on postoperative speech perception. Conclusion Straight electrode arrays with longer lengths achieved deeper angular insertion depths of the basal-most electrode. Cochlear morphology does not have a substantial influence on the position of basal-most electrode. The study confirms that the basal area of the cochlea, responsible for high-frequency range during acoustic stimulation, is not the primary region for speech understanding via electrical stimulation with CI.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Beck et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: