Cochlear Implantation Assisted by Noninvasive Image Guidance

Matsumoto, Nozomu; Oka, Masahisa; Cho, Byunghyun; Hong, Jin; Jinnouchi, Misaki; Ouchida, Riichi; Hashizume, Makoto; Komune, Shizuo

doi:10.1097/mao.0b013e318268d1e9

Cited by 28 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Alternative registration methods have also been investigated within the specific context of otologic surgery; the use of patient specific templates demonstrated an accuracy of 0.94 ± 0.29 mm at the round window in phantom testing [9]. The technique was further evaluated in 25 cochlear implantation surgeries, with estimated TRE values between 0.57 and 5 mm observed [10]. Up to now there is no standardized method for the reporting of registration accuracy making comparison between studies difficult, particularly when anatomical site and surgical task vary widely.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surface matching for high-accuracy registration of the lateral skull base

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surface matching for high-accuracy registration of the lateral skull base

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Staecker et al [19] proposed a registration method with a combination of lateral and malleus short process, which can improve the accuracy of temporal bone surgery to 0.9-1.5 mm. Surface template-assisted marker positioning (STAMP) was also proposed by Japanese researchers, [20,21] which could achieve smaller TREs (<1 mm near the cochlear implant point) in both simulations and actual surgeries, though this method required relatively greater exposure of the bone surface during the operation. Considering these aspects, a combination of an anatomical marker malleus short process and the morphological characteristics of the temporal bone surface were proposed by the current study, in order to obtain high registration accuracy and minimal trauma.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of bonebed-malleus short process registration in minimally invasive cochlear implantation

Zhang

et al. 2016

Computer Assisted Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: This article proposed and investigated the application of bonebed-malleus short process registration in minimally invasive cochlear implantation, and assessed the value of the proposed strategy for image-guided otologic surgery. Materials and methods: Ten temporal bone specimens were marked with both shallow and deep targets in order to measure registration resolutions. Two registration methods were applied. Method A (a new registration method) consisted of bonebed-malleus short process registration, while method B (traditional registration method) comprised registration using four titanium screws attached at the mastoid surface. The target registration errors (TRE) were measured at both the shallow and deep fiducial targets. After registration achieved by method A, percutaneous cochlear drilling was conducted on the other eight temporal bone specimens in order to observe the deviation from the target point and entry point. Results: Using method A, the error observed at the shallow fiducial markers of specimens was less than 1 mm, while the error observed at the deep fiducial markers was approximately equal to 1 mm. No significant difference was observed when results were compared with the application of method B. In eight studied cases using method A, drilling operations were successfully conducted. The deviations from the target point and the entry point were 0.84 ± 0.30 and 0.66 ± 0.51 mm, respectively. Conclusions: Results of the present study indicated that the new registration method demonstrated identical accuracy when compared to traditional registration method, achieved less invasiveness. Thus, the proposed method might be a feasible registration method for image-guided otologic surgery due to its mild invasiveness and high accuracy.

show abstract

“…They reported a deviation of 1.6 mm around the cochleostomy site. Matsumoto et al (29) developed a noninvasive image guidance for cochlear implant surgery using the STAMP method and navigation software. They reported an average registration error of 2.4 mm.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%