Radiological parameters related to success of the round window approach in cochlear implantation: A retrospective study
Objectives To evaluate the radiologic parameters related to success of round window (RW) approach for cochlear implantation (CI). Design A retrospective cohort study. Setting Academic‐tertiary centre. Participants Eighty‐four consecutive patients without inner ear anomaly who underwent CI with the i...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Clinical otolaryngology 2018-12, Vol.43 (6), p.1535-1540 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1540 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 1535 |
container_title | Clinical otolaryngology |
container_volume | 43 |
creator | Kang, Jae‐Yoon Chung, Jee‐Hye Park, Hee‐Sung Park, Yong‐Ho Choi, Jin Woong |
description | Objectives
To evaluate the radiologic parameters related to success of round window (RW) approach for cochlear implantation (CI).
Design
A retrospective cohort study.
Setting
Academic‐tertiary centre.
Participants
Eighty‐four consecutive patients without inner ear anomaly who underwent CI with the intent of the RW approach were included. The RW approach was performed through the facial recess after posterior tympanotomy (RW group). When the RW approach was not possible despite maximum effort to expose the RW, promontory cochleostomy (PC) was performed (PC group).
Main outcome measures
The following radiologic parameters were compared between the two groups: (a) Width of the facial recess, (b) oblique distance between the cochlear basal turn (CBT) and facial nerve (FN), (c) anteroposterior distance between the posterior margin of the RW and FN and (d) angle between the EAC and CBT.
Results
Seventy patients (83.3%) were implanted using the RW approach, and 14 patients (16.7%) underwent the PC approach for CI. The anteroposterior distance between the posterior margin of the RW and FN and the angle between the EAC and CBT in the RW group were significantly longer and wider than those in the PC group (P < 0.001 and P = 0.001, respectively). Multivariate analysis revealed that these two parameters were independent parameters for success of the RW approach.
Conclusions
The distance between the posterior margin of the RW and FN and the angle between the EAC and CBT are associated with success of RW approach. Therefore, preoperative radiologic analysis of the two parameters might help CI surgeons to select RW approach. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/coa.13207 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2086258533</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2086258533</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3537-e648ff14707cecb079cf4ada8fe0b9a8a8be656d8ad9dade35f9b706f061b2743</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kU2LFDEQhoMo7oce_AMS8OIeZjfppDtpb8PgFywsiJ5DdVJxsnR32iTtMP_e6Kx7EMylcnh4eKteQl5xds3ru7ERrrlomHpCzrmS_UZK3T19_Ct9Ri5yvmdMCqb4c3ImGOs51-ycHL6AC3GM34OFkS6QYMKCKdOEIxR0tESaV2sxZxo9LXukKa6zo4cwu3igsCwpgt3TMFMb7X5ESDRMywhzgRLi_I5uq6ukmBe0JfxEmsvqji_IMw9jxpcP85J8-_D-6-7T5vbu4-fd9nZjRSvUBjupvedSMWXRDkz11ktwoD2yoQcNesCu7ZwG1ztwKFrfD4p1nnV8aJQUl-TtyVtj_lgxFzOFbHGs-TCu2TRMd02rWyEq-uYf9D6uaa7pTMOF7HvFeVupqxNl60o5oTdLChOko-HM_G7D1DbMnzYq-_rBuA4Tukfy7_krcHMCDmHE4_9NZne3PSl_AQz-lc8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2134997115</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Radiological parameters related to success of the round window approach in cochlear implantation: A retrospective study</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Kang, Jae‐Yoon ; Chung, Jee‐Hye ; Park, Hee‐Sung ; Park, Yong‐Ho ; Choi, Jin Woong</creator><creatorcontrib>Kang, Jae‐Yoon ; Chung, Jee‐Hye ; Park, Hee‐Sung ; Park, Yong‐Ho ; Choi, Jin Woong</creatorcontrib><description>Objectives
To evaluate the radiologic parameters related to success of round window (RW) approach for cochlear implantation (CI).
Design
A retrospective cohort study.
Setting
Academic‐tertiary centre.
Participants
Eighty‐four consecutive patients without inner ear anomaly who underwent CI with the intent of the RW approach were included. The RW approach was performed through the facial recess after posterior tympanotomy (RW group). When the RW approach was not possible despite maximum effort to expose the RW, promontory cochleostomy (PC) was performed (PC group).
Main outcome measures
The following radiologic parameters were compared between the two groups: (a) Width of the facial recess, (b) oblique distance between the cochlear basal turn (CBT) and facial nerve (FN), (c) anteroposterior distance between the posterior margin of the RW and FN and (d) angle between the EAC and CBT.
Results
Seventy patients (83.3%) were implanted using the RW approach, and 14 patients (16.7%) underwent the PC approach for CI. The anteroposterior distance between the posterior margin of the RW and FN and the angle between the EAC and CBT in the RW group were significantly longer and wider than those in the PC group (P < 0.001 and P = 0.001, respectively). Multivariate analysis revealed that these two parameters were independent parameters for success of the RW approach.
Conclusions
The distance between the posterior margin of the RW and FN and the angle between the EAC and CBT are associated with success of RW approach. Therefore, preoperative radiologic analysis of the two parameters might help CI surgeons to select RW approach.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1749-4478</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1749-4486</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/coa.13207</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30091180</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Cochlea ; cochlear implant ; cochlear implantation ; Cochlear implants ; Facial nerve ; Implantation ; Inner ear ; Medical personnel ; Multivariate analysis ; Parameters ; Patients ; radiology ; round window ; Success ; temporal bone computed tomography</subject><ispartof>Clinical otolaryngology, 2018-12, Vol.43 (6), p.1535-1540</ispartof><rights>2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd</rights><rights>2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3537-e648ff14707cecb079cf4ada8fe0b9a8a8be656d8ad9dade35f9b706f061b2743</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3537-e648ff14707cecb079cf4ada8fe0b9a8a8be656d8ad9dade35f9b706f061b2743</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-3101-6841</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fcoa.13207$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fcoa.13207$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27903,27904,45553,45554</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30091180$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kang, Jae‐Yoon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chung, Jee‐Hye</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Park, Hee‐Sung</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Park, Yong‐Ho</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Choi, Jin Woong</creatorcontrib><title>Radiological parameters related to success of the round window approach in cochlear implantation: A retrospective study</title><title>Clinical otolaryngology</title><addtitle>Clin Otolaryngol</addtitle><description>Objectives
To evaluate the radiologic parameters related to success of round window (RW) approach for cochlear implantation (CI).
Design
A retrospective cohort study.
Setting
Academic‐tertiary centre.
Participants
Eighty‐four consecutive patients without inner ear anomaly who underwent CI with the intent of the RW approach were included. The RW approach was performed through the facial recess after posterior tympanotomy (RW group). When the RW approach was not possible despite maximum effort to expose the RW, promontory cochleostomy (PC) was performed (PC group).
Main outcome measures
The following radiologic parameters were compared between the two groups: (a) Width of the facial recess, (b) oblique distance between the cochlear basal turn (CBT) and facial nerve (FN), (c) anteroposterior distance between the posterior margin of the RW and FN and (d) angle between the EAC and CBT.
Results
Seventy patients (83.3%) were implanted using the RW approach, and 14 patients (16.7%) underwent the PC approach for CI. The anteroposterior distance between the posterior margin of the RW and FN and the angle between the EAC and CBT in the RW group were significantly longer and wider than those in the PC group (P < 0.001 and P = 0.001, respectively). Multivariate analysis revealed that these two parameters were independent parameters for success of the RW approach.
Conclusions
The distance between the posterior margin of the RW and FN and the angle between the EAC and CBT are associated with success of RW approach. Therefore, preoperative radiologic analysis of the two parameters might help CI surgeons to select RW approach.</description><subject>Cochlea</subject><subject>cochlear implant</subject><subject>cochlear implantation</subject><subject>Cochlear implants</subject><subject>Facial nerve</subject><subject>Implantation</subject><subject>Inner ear</subject><subject>Medical personnel</subject><subject>Multivariate analysis</subject><subject>Parameters</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>radiology</subject><subject>round window</subject><subject>Success</subject><subject>temporal bone computed tomography</subject><issn>1749-4478</issn><issn>1749-4486</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kU2LFDEQhoMo7oce_AMS8OIeZjfppDtpb8PgFywsiJ5DdVJxsnR32iTtMP_e6Kx7EMylcnh4eKteQl5xds3ru7ERrrlomHpCzrmS_UZK3T19_Ct9Ri5yvmdMCqb4c3ImGOs51-ycHL6AC3GM34OFkS6QYMKCKdOEIxR0tESaV2sxZxo9LXukKa6zo4cwu3igsCwpgt3TMFMb7X5ESDRMywhzgRLi_I5uq6ukmBe0JfxEmsvqji_IMw9jxpcP85J8-_D-6-7T5vbu4-fd9nZjRSvUBjupvedSMWXRDkz11ktwoD2yoQcNesCu7ZwG1ztwKFrfD4p1nnV8aJQUl-TtyVtj_lgxFzOFbHGs-TCu2TRMd02rWyEq-uYf9D6uaa7pTMOF7HvFeVupqxNl60o5oTdLChOko-HM_G7D1DbMnzYq-_rBuA4Tukfy7_krcHMCDmHE4_9NZne3PSl_AQz-lc8</recordid><startdate>201812</startdate><enddate>201812</enddate><creator>Kang, Jae‐Yoon</creator><creator>Chung, Jee‐Hye</creator><creator>Park, Hee‐Sung</creator><creator>Park, Yong‐Ho</creator><creator>Choi, Jin Woong</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M7Z</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3101-6841</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201812</creationdate><title>Radiological parameters related to success of the round window approach in cochlear implantation: A retrospective study</title><author>Kang, Jae‐Yoon ; Chung, Jee‐Hye ; Park, Hee‐Sung ; Park, Yong‐Ho ; Choi, Jin Woong</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3537-e648ff14707cecb079cf4ada8fe0b9a8a8be656d8ad9dade35f9b706f061b2743</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Cochlea</topic><topic>cochlear implant</topic><topic>cochlear implantation</topic><topic>Cochlear implants</topic><topic>Facial nerve</topic><topic>Implantation</topic><topic>Inner ear</topic><topic>Medical personnel</topic><topic>Multivariate analysis</topic><topic>Parameters</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>radiology</topic><topic>round window</topic><topic>Success</topic><topic>temporal bone computed tomography</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kang, Jae‐Yoon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chung, Jee‐Hye</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Park, Hee‐Sung</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Park, Yong‐Ho</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Choi, Jin Woong</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Biochemistry Abstracts 1</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Clinical otolaryngology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kang, Jae‐Yoon</au><au>Chung, Jee‐Hye</au><au>Park, Hee‐Sung</au><au>Park, Yong‐Ho</au><au>Choi, Jin Woong</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Radiological parameters related to success of the round window approach in cochlear implantation: A retrospective study</atitle><jtitle>Clinical otolaryngology</jtitle><addtitle>Clin Otolaryngol</addtitle><date>2018-12</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>43</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>1535</spage><epage>1540</epage><pages>1535-1540</pages><issn>1749-4478</issn><eissn>1749-4486</eissn><abstract>Objectives
To evaluate the radiologic parameters related to success of round window (RW) approach for cochlear implantation (CI).
Design
A retrospective cohort study.
Setting
Academic‐tertiary centre.
Participants
Eighty‐four consecutive patients without inner ear anomaly who underwent CI with the intent of the RW approach were included. The RW approach was performed through the facial recess after posterior tympanotomy (RW group). When the RW approach was not possible despite maximum effort to expose the RW, promontory cochleostomy (PC) was performed (PC group).
Main outcome measures
The following radiologic parameters were compared between the two groups: (a) Width of the facial recess, (b) oblique distance between the cochlear basal turn (CBT) and facial nerve (FN), (c) anteroposterior distance between the posterior margin of the RW and FN and (d) angle between the EAC and CBT.
Results
Seventy patients (83.3%) were implanted using the RW approach, and 14 patients (16.7%) underwent the PC approach for CI. The anteroposterior distance between the posterior margin of the RW and FN and the angle between the EAC and CBT in the RW group were significantly longer and wider than those in the PC group (P < 0.001 and P = 0.001, respectively). Multivariate analysis revealed that these two parameters were independent parameters for success of the RW approach.
Conclusions
The distance between the posterior margin of the RW and FN and the angle between the EAC and CBT are associated with success of RW approach. Therefore, preoperative radiologic analysis of the two parameters might help CI surgeons to select RW approach.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><pmid>30091180</pmid><doi>10.1111/coa.13207</doi><tpages>6</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3101-6841</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1749-4478 |
ispartof | Clinical otolaryngology, 2018-12, Vol.43 (6), p.1535-1540 |
issn | 1749-4478 1749-4486 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2086258533 |
source | Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
subjects | Cochlea cochlear implant cochlear implantation Cochlear implants Facial nerve Implantation Inner ear Medical personnel Multivariate analysis Parameters Patients radiology round window Success temporal bone computed tomography |
title | Radiological parameters related to success of the round window approach in cochlear implantation: A retrospective study |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-21T12%3A17%3A48IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Radiological%20parameters%20related%20to%20success%20of%20the%20round%20window%20approach%20in%20cochlear%20implantation:%20A%20retrospective%20study&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20otolaryngology&rft.au=Kang,%20Jae%E2%80%90Yoon&rft.date=2018-12&rft.volume=43&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1535&rft.epage=1540&rft.pages=1535-1540&rft.issn=1749-4478&rft.eissn=1749-4486&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/coa.13207&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2086258533%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2134997115&rft_id=info:pmid/30091180&rfr_iscdi=true |