Cochlear duct length and cochlear distance on preoperative CT: imaging markers for estimating insertion depth angle of cochlear implant electrode

Preoperative Imaging in Cochlear Implants

OBJECTIVE

To determine the utility of computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in cochlear implant candidates.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective case review.

SETTING

Tertiary referral hospital.

PATIENTS

A total of 207 cochlear implanted patients with CT and/or MRI.

INTERVENTIONS

N/A.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Age versus abnormal radiologic findings, imaging abnormality versus postoperative outcomes, postoperative outcomes versus electrode design, Cambridge Cochlear Implant Protocol (CCIP) status for imaging abnormalities, sensitivity and specificity of CT and MRI for round-window/cochlear occlusion, and MRI for incomplete partitions.

RESULTS

A total of 207 patients with CT, MRI, or both were reviewed retrospectively. Less than half (15.5%) of CT scans had findings that might affect surgical intervention compared with 5.9% of MRI. No significant difference was found between children and adults for relevant imaging abnormalities (grade 4 or higher) with either CT (p = 0.931) or MRI (p = 0.606). CCIP status correlated with cochlear abnormalities (p = 0.040); however, only 46.2% of radiographic abnormalities on CT would be identified by these criteria. For detecting cochlear occlusion requiring surgical intervention, the sensitivity and specificity for CT were 40% (4 of 10; 95% confidence interval [CI], 12.16-73.76) and 95.73% (95% CI, 91.40-98.27), respectively. For MRI, the sensitivity and specificity were 33.33% (1 of 3; 95% CI, 0.84-90.57) and 96.97% (63 of 65; 95% CI, 89.32-99.63), respectively. There was no difference for postoperative AzBio scores for higher-grade imaging abnormalities (p = 0.6012) or for electrode designs (p = 0.3699).

CONCLUSIONS

Significant radiographic abnormalities were relatively uncommon in cochlear implant patients on either CT or MRI at our single-center institution. If present, abnormal imaging findings rarely translated to management changes. CCIP status does not reliably predict which patients are likely to have abnormalities. Both MRI and CT have low sensitivity for round-window or cochlear occlusion, but detection likely leads to changes in surgical management.

Comprehension of Cochlear Duct Length for Incomplete Partition Types

OBJECTIVE

Preoperative assessment of the cochlear duct length (CDL) and cochlear dimensions allows the selection of optimized implants. We aimed to evaluate the CDL measurements in incomplete partition (IP) defect patients and to create a reference to the literature.

METHODS

Forty-one patients with IP (13 IP I, 23 IP II, and 5 IP III) and 30 controls were included in the study. The standardized cochlear image showing the basal turn in the most expansive plane was reconstructed from temporal high-resolution computed tomography images. Cochlear duct length measured manually (CDL-M) was measured by points placed consecutively on the lateral wall of the cochlea. The defined equations for estimating CDL (CDL measured according to Schurzig et al formula [CDL-Ɵ], CDL measured according to Escudé et al formula [CDL-E], CDL measured according to Alexiades et al formula [CDL-A]) were calculated from the same images. Cochlear duct length mean values obtained by each method were compared for each IP type.

RESULTS

The longest CDL value was found in the control group, irrespective of the calculation method. Incomplete partition II cases had the most extended mean CDL among IP types. Incomplete partition III had the shortest CDL among all groups' CDL-M values. However, the mean CDL-M values of IP types I and III showed close results. There was no significant difference between the CDL-E and CDL-M values of the control group. Similarly, no significant difference was found between CDL-Ɵ and CDL-M values in IP type III cases. However, the results of other estimating formulations of all groups differed significantly from CDL-M values.

CONCLUSION

Cochlear duct length differences were detected between the control group and IP subtypes. These differences should be considered when choosing the appropriate electrode length. Because the results of formulas estimating CDL may differ from CDL-M in both control and IP cases, it would be more appropriate to use manual measurements in clinical practice.

Variation in cochlear size: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Advancements in imaging and implantation technology have invited reexamination of the classic teaching that the human cochlea maintains uniform size across demographics. Yet, studies yield conflicting results and relatively few broad systematic reviews have examined cochlear size variation.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to quantify cochlear variability across eight different measurement categories and suggest normative values and ranges for each with consideration of disease state and gender where possible.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted up to October 1, 2022, using the search terms "Cochlea/anatomy and histology"[Mesh]) AND 'size'" with filters "Humans" and "English" across three databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Medline). Further inclusion criteria involved reporting of numerical measurements in any of the eight included categories.

RESULTS

Of the 625 articles manually reviewed for relevance by title and abstract, 91 were selected for full-text review and 33 met all eligibility criteria. 5,791 cochleae were included and weighted means and ranges were calculated: "A" value (defined as the distance from the round window, through the modiolus, to the oppsite lateral wall) = 9.23 mm (8.43-10.4 mm, n = 2559); cochlear duct length (CDL) = 33.04 mm (range 28.2-36.4 mm, n = 2252); cochlear height = 5.14 mm (2.8-6.9 mm, n = 2098); the basal turn lumen diameter = 2.09 mm (1.7-2.2 mm, n = 617); "B" value (defined as perpendicular to "A" value and in the same plane) = 6.52 mm (5.73-6.9 mm, n = 908); width of the basal turn = 6.4 mm (6.22-6.86 mm, n = 356); height of the basal turn = 1.96 mm (1.77-2.56 mm, n = 204); length of the basal turn 21.87 mm (21.03-22.5 mm, n = 384).

CONCLUSION

A notable size range exists across the eight different cochlear parameters considered and we provide normative values for each measurement. Females tend to have smaller CDL and "A" value than males and the sensorineural hearing loss patients had smaller CDL and "A" value but larger cochlear height than the general population.

Cochlear implantation: Predicting the scala tympani volume of the pediatric recipients

OBJECTIVES

The main aim of this study was to estimate the volume of the Scala Tympani (ST) of our pediatric cochlear implant (CI) recipients from the computed tomography (CT) images. Then, to study the association between ST volume and both demographic characteristics and cochlear parameters.

METHODS

A retrospective study on the CT scans of pediatric CI patients at a tertiary referral CI center. Congenital or acquired cochlear defects were excluded. Two reviewers, with the same level of experience, blindly measured the main cochlear parameters and studied its anatomy. Then, the interrater reliability was tested to measure any differences between the two readings. After that, the ST volume of the included patients was calculated and analyzed. Furthermore, the correlations between the main cochlear parameters and ST volume were studied to propose a formula for estimating the ST volume from the cochlear duct length (CDL).

RESULTS

The mean predicted ST volume among our pediatric CI recipients was 38.51 ± 5.54 μl (range; 24.47-52.57 μl). The statistical analysis revealed that all cochlear parameters (A, B, H, and CDL values) could be significant predictors of the ST volume (p=<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

The main cochlear parameters along with the CDL are positively linked to the ST volume. There are considerable differences in cochlear size and scala tympani volume among our pediatric population. These findings confirm the importance of pre-operative planning for proper electrode array selection.

CT imaging-based approaches to cochlear duct length estimation-a human temporal bone study

Objectives

Knowledge about cochlear duct length (CDL) may assist electrode choice in cochlear implantation (CI). However, no gold standard for clinical applicable estimation of CDL exists. The aim of this study is (1) to determine the most reliable radiological imaging method and imaging processing software for measuring CDL from clinical routine imaging and (2) to accurately predict the insertion depth of the CI electrode.

Methods

Twenty human temporal bones were examined using different sectional imaging techniques (high-resolution computed tomography [HRCT] and cone beam computed tomography [CBCT]). CDL was measured using three methods: length estimation using (1) a dedicated preclinical 3D reconstruction software, (2) the established A-value method, and (3) a clinically approved otosurgical planning software. Temporal bones were implanted with a 31.5-mm CI electrode and measurements were compared to a reference based on the CI electrode insertion angle measured by radiographs in Stenvers projection (CDL_reference).

Results

A mean cochlear coverage of 74% (SD 7.4%) was found. The CDL_reference showed significant differences to each other method (p < 0.001). The strongest correlation to the CDL_reference was found for the otosurgical planning software-based method obtained from HRCT (CDL_SW-HRCT; r = 0.87, p < 0.001) and from CBCT (CDL_SW-CBCT; r = 0.76, p < 0.001). Overall, CDL was underestimated by each applied method. The inter-rater reliability was fair for the CDL estimation based on 3D reconstruction from CBCT (CDL_3D-CBCT; intra-class correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.43), good for CDL estimation based on 3D reconstruction from HRCT (CDL_3D-HRCT; ICC = 0.71), poor for CDL estimation based on the A-value method from HRCT (CDL_A-HRCT; ICC = 0.29), and excellent for CDL estimation based on the A-value method from CBCT (CDL_A-CBCT; ICC = 0.87) as well as for the CDL_SW-HRCT (ICC = 0.94), CDL_SW-CBCT (ICC = 0.94) and CDL_reference (ICC = 0.87).

Conclusions

All approaches would have led to an electrode choice of rather too short electrodes. Concerning treatment decisions based on CDL measurements, the otosurgical planning software-based method has to be recommended. The best inter-rater reliability was found for CDL_A-CBCT, for CDL_SW-HRCT, for CDL_SW-CBCT, and for CDL_reference.

Key Points

• Clinically applicable calculations using high-resolution CT and cone beam CT underestimate the cochlear size.

• Ten percent of cochlear duct length need to be added to current calculations in order to predict the postoperative CI electrode position.

• The clinically approved otosurgical planning software-based method software is the most suitable to estimate the cochlear duct length and shows an excellent inter-rater reliability.