Hampshire Sheep as a Large-Animal Model for Cochlear Implantation

Background Sheep have been proposed as a large-animal model for studying cochlear implantation. However, prior sheep studies report that the facial nerve (FN) obscures the round window membrane (RWM), requiring FN sacrifice or a retrofacial opening to access the middle-ear cavity posterior to the FN...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology 2024, Vol.25 (3), p.277-284
Hauptverfasser: Waring, Nicholas A., Chern, Alexander, Vilarello, Brandon J., Cheng, Yew Song, Zhou, Chaoqun, Lang, Jeffrey H., Olson, Elizabeth S., Nakajima, Hideko Heidi
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background Sheep have been proposed as a large-animal model for studying cochlear implantation. However, prior sheep studies report that the facial nerve (FN) obscures the round window membrane (RWM), requiring FN sacrifice or a retrofacial opening to access the middle-ear cavity posterior to the FN for cochlear implantation. We investigated surgical access to the RWM in Hampshire sheep compared to Suffolk-Dorset sheep and the feasibility of Hampshire sheep for cochlear implantation via a facial recess approach. Methods Sixteen temporal bones from cadaveric sheep heads (ten Hampshire and six Suffolk-Dorset) were dissected to gain surgical access to the RWM via an extended facial recess approach. RWM visibility was graded using St. Thomas’ Hospital (STH) classification. Cochlear implant (CI) electrode array insertion was performed in two Hampshire specimens. Micro-CT scans were obtained for each temporal bone, with confirmation of appropriate electrode array placement and segmentation of the inner ear structures. Results Visibility of the RWM on average was 83% in Hampshire specimens and 59% in Suffolk-Dorset specimens ( p  = 0.0262). Hampshire RWM visibility was Type I (100% visibility) for three specimens and Type IIa (> 50% visibility) for seven specimens. Suffolk-Dorset RWM visibility was Type IIa for four specimens and Type IIb (
ISSN:1438-7573
1525-3961
1438-7573
DOI:10.1007/s10162-024-00946-1