Aims: The Nucleus CI532 cochlear implant incorporates a new precurved electrode array, i.e., the Slim Modiolar electrode (SME), which is designed to bring electrode contacts close to the medial wall of the cochlea while avoiding trauma due to scalar dislocation or contact with the lateral wall during insertion. The primary aim of this prospective study was to determine the final position of the electrode array in clinical cases as evaluated using flat-panel volume computed tomography. Methods: Forty-five adult candidates for unilateral cochlear implantation were recruited from 8 centers. Eleven surgeons attended a temporal bone workshop and received further training with a transparent plastic cochlear model just prior to the first surgery. Feedback on the surgical approach and use of the SME was collected via a questionnaire for each case. Computed tomography of the temporal bone was performed postoperatively using flat-panel digital volume tomography or cone beam systems. The primary measure was the final scalar position of the SME (completely in scala tympani or not). Secondly, medial-lateral position and insertion depth were evaluated. Results: Forty-four subjects received a CI532. The SME was located completely in scala tympani for all subjects. Pure round window (44% of the cases), extended round window (22%), and inferior and/or anterior cochleostomy (34%) approaches were successful across surgeons and cases. The SME was generally positioned close to the modiolus. Overinsertion of the array past the first marker tended to push the basal contacts towards the lateral wall and served only to increase the insertion depth of the first electrode contact without increasing the insertion depth of the most apical electrode. Complications were limited to tip fold-overs encountered in 2 subjects; both were attributed to surgical error, with both reimplanted successfully. Conclusions: The new Nucleus CI532 cochlear implant with SME achieved the design goal of producing little or no trauma as indicated by consistent scala tympani placement. Surgeons should be carefully trained to use the new deployment method such that tip fold-overs and over insertion may be avoided.

The cemento-ossifying fibroma (COF) is a mesodermal, non-odontogenic tumour of ectopic multipotential periodontal membrane blast cells. It is aggressive, locally destructive, and has a high recurrence rate. A case report of COF of the petromastoid region is presented. This location has not been described until now. Trauma may act as a trigger to sudden growth of the atopic periodontal tissue. Due to the aggressive behaviour of this tumour and its frequent recurrence radical surgery is needed.

No abstract

No abstract

We believe that if performed regularly, the RWM insertion technique has almost no negative effects on vestibular receptor function and produces no vertigo. However, cochlear hair cells may be more sensitive to electrode insertion traumas than vestibular receptor cells. The use of perimodiolar electrodes may require more atraumatic electrodes to achieve hearing preservation.

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Transimpedance measurements from cochlear implant electrodes have the potential to identify anomalous electrode array placement, such as tip fold-over (TFO) or fold-back, basal electrode kinking, or buckling. Analysing transimpedance may thus replace intraoperative or post-operative radiological imaging to detect any potential misplacements. A transimpedance algorithm was previously developed to detect deviations from a normal electrode position with the aim of intraoperatively detecting TFO. The algorithm had been calibrated on 35 forced, tip folded electrode arrays in six temporal bones to determine the threshold criterion required to achieve a sensitivity of 100%. Our primary objective here was to estimate the specificity of this TFO algorithm in patients, in a prospective study, for a series of electrode arrays shown to be normally inserted by post-operative imaging. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Intracochlear voltages were intraoperatively recorded for 157 ears, using Cochlear’s Custom Sound™ EP 5 electrophysiological software (Cochlear Ltd., Sydney, NSW, Australia), for both Nucleus® CI512 and CI532 electrode arrays. The algorithm analysed the recorded 22 × 22 transimpedance matrix (TIM) and results were displayed as a heatmap intraoperatively, only visible to the technician in the operating theatre. After all clinical data were collected, the algorithm was evaluated on the bench. The algorithm measures the transimpedance gradients and corresponding phase angles (θ) throughout the TIM and calculates the gradient phase range. If this was greater than the predetermined threshold, the algorithm classified the electrode array insertion as having a TFO. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Five ears had no intraoperative TIM and four anomalous matrices were identified from heatmaps and removed from the specificity analysis. Using the 148 remaining data sets (<i>n</i> = 103 CI532 and <i>n</i> = 45 CI512), the algorithm had an average specificity of 98.6% (95.80%–99.75%). <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> The algorithm was found to be an effective screening tool for the identification of TFOs. Its specificity was within acceptable levels and resulted in a positive predictive value of 76%, with an estimated incidence of fold-over of 4% in perimodiolar arrays. This would mean 3 out of 4 cases flagged as a fold-over would be correctly identified by the algorithm, with the other being a false positive. The measurements were applied easily in theatre allowing it to be used as a routine clinical tool for confirming correct electrode placement.

A multichannel cochlear implant lead to a significant improvement of speech comprehension in these patients with residual hearing. We can successfully implant patients with minimal benefit of their well fitted hearing aids. Our group is too small to be able to define general selection criteria. For the time being we use as an audiological indication a open-set monosyllabic word intelligibility of not more than 30% at 70 dB with well fitted hearing aids.

Background: The perimodiolar CI532 Slim Modiolar electrode has been designed to bring the electrode contacts close to auditory nerve while reducing cochlear trauma during its insertion. It is currently unknown to what extent the electrode position and electrophysiological outcomes of the Slim Modiolar electrode differ from other perimodiolar electrodes. Objectives: The objective was to compare the electrode position and electrophysiological outcomes between the CI532 Slim Modiolar and CI512 Contour Advance electrode. Method: Forty-six adult patients received a Slim Modiolar or Contour Advance electrode. Electrode types were compared using intraoperative electrode impedances, evoked compound action potential (ECAP) and stapedius reflex thresholds, as well as position parameters from postoperative computed tomography or digital volume tomography images (medial-lateral position, electrode-to-modiolus distance, insertion angle). Results: The medial-lateral position indicates a closer modiolar placement of the Slim Modiolar compared with the Contour Advance. Individual electrode contact measurements, however, showed significantly larger electrode-to-modiolus distances and higher ECAP thresholds for the Slim Modiolar in the basal region. On contacts E20–22 the Slim Modiolar is slightly closer to the modiolus compared with the Contour Advance, but this did not result in lower ECAP thresholds. Conclusions: Perimodiolar electrodes can vary in their intracochlear position, leading to divergent electrophysiological outcomes. To detect these differences, investigations must be done for each electrode contact rather than using a global factor for the whole electrode array. While the electrode dislocation rate is lower with the Slim Modiolar than with the Contour Advance, electrode-to-modiolus proximity is smaller and ECAP thresholds are lower with the Contour Advance in the basal cochlear region.