Spread of the intracochlear electrical field: Implications for assessing electrode array location in cochlear implantation.

The electrode-generated intracochlear electrical field (EF) spreads widely along the scala tympani surrounded by poorly-conducting tissue and it can be measured with monopolar transimpedance matrix (TIMmp). Bipolar TIM (TIMbp) allows estimations of local potential differences. With TIMmp, the correct alignment of the electrode array can be assessed, and TIMbp may be useful in more subtle evaluations of the electrode array's intracochlear location. In this temporal bone study, we investigated the effect of the cross-sectional scala area (SA) and the electrode-medial-wall distance (EMWD) on both TIMmp and TIMbp using three types of electrode arrays. Also, multiple linear regressions based on the TIMmp and TIMbp measurements were used to estimate the SA and EMWD. Six cadaver temporal bones were consecutively implanted with a lateral-wall electrode array (Slim Straight) and with two different precurved perimodiolar electrode arrays (Contour Advance and Slim Modiolar) for variation in EMWD. The bones were imaged with cone-beam computed tomography with simultaneous TIMmp and TIMbp measurements. The results from imaging and EF measurements were compared. SA increased from apical to basal direction (r = 0.96, p < 0.001). Intracochlear EF peak negatively correlated with SA (r = -0.55, p < 0.001) irrespective of the EMWD. The rate of the EF decay did not correlate with SA but it was faster in the proximity of the medial wall than in more lateral positions (r = 0.35, p < 0.001). For a linear comparison between the EF decaying proportionally to squared distance and anatomic dimensions, a square root of inverse TIMbp was applied and found to be affected by both SA and EMWD (r = 0.44 and r = 0.49, p < 0.001 for both). A regression model confirmed that together TIMmp and TIMbp can be used to estimate both SA and EMWD (R2 = 0.47 and R2 = 0.44, respectively, p < 0.001 for both). In TIMmp, EF peaks grow from basal to apical direction and EF decay is steeper in the proximity of the medial wall than in more lateral positions. Local potentials measured via TIMbp correlate with both SA and EMWD. Altogether, TIMmp and TIMbp can be used to assess the intracochlear and intrascalar position of the electrode array, and they may reduce the need for intra- and postoperative imaging in the future.

OPTIMISING THE PARAMETERS OF COCHLEAR IMPLANT IMAGING WITH CONE-BEAM COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY.

With computed tomography (CT), the delicate structures of the inner ear may be hard to visualise, which a cochlear implant (CI) electrode array can further complicate. The usefulness of a novel cone-beam CT device in CI recipient's inner ear imaging was evaluated and the exposure parameters were optimised to attain adequate clinical image quality at the lowest effective dose (ED). Six temporal bones were implanted with a Cochlear Slim Straight electrode array and imaged with six different imaging protocols. Contrast-to-noise ratio was calculated for each imaging protocol, and three observers evaluated independently the image quality of each imaging protocol and temporal bone. The overall image quality of the inner ear structures did not differ between the imaging protocols and the most relevant inner ear structures of CI recipient's inner ear can be visualised with a low ED. To visualise the most delicate structures in the inner ear, imaging protocols with higher radiation exposure may be required.

The intraoperative relationship between intracochlear electrical field and excitability of the auditory nerve.

A limiting factor of cochlear implant (CI) technology is the electrode-contact overlapping spread of the electrode-generated intracochlear electrical field (EF). While the extent of the spread can be reduced with intracochlear ground electrodes, the stimulation level must be increased to reach similar loudness as with monopolar stimulation utilizing an extracochlear ground. In this study, we investigated the relationship between the monopolar intracochlear EF and the minimum stimulation level required for a measurable neural response assessed with electrically evoked compound action potential (eCAP) thresholds in intraoperative settings. Also, the effect of cochlear diameter on the intracochlear EF was evaluated, as narrower intracochlear EFs were found from larger than smaller cochleae in an earlier study. A total of 171 ears of severely-to-profoundly hearing-impaired patients (ages 0.7-89 years; 42.5 ± 27.8 years, mean ± SD) implanted with a Cochlear Nucleus CI522 or CI622 implant and Slim Straight electrode array or with a Med-El Synchrony implant and Flex 28 electrode array were included in the study. Normal anatomy was established and cochlear diameter was measured for all patients from preoperative imaging. Intraoperative intracochlear EF and eCAP threshold measurements were measured for both Cochlear and Med-El devices with the CIs' back-telemetry options, and EF and eCAP were compared for Cochlear devices. The peak and width of the intracochlear EF correlated with each other (r = 0.46, p < 0.001), and both had an inverse relationship with eCAP thresholds (r = -0.41, p < 0.001 and r = -0.29, p < 0.001, respectively). The peak amplitudes of the intracochlear EF increased towards the apical part of the electrode array with both Cochlear (r = 0.97, p < 0.001) and Med-El (r = 0.80, p = 0.002) devices. The peak amplitudes of the intracochlear EF were shallower across the electrode array in large than in small cochleae (p < 0.05). Our results indicate that the responsiveness of the cochlear nerve is not only dependent on neural health but is also affected by the physical environment of the electrode array, which can be assessed by measuring the intracochlear EF. Further studies are warranted to investigate the detailed characteristics of the intracochlear current spread in CI recipients with varying anatomical features of the cochlea and with electrode arrays with different locations in the scalae or related to the modiolus in the cochleae.

Investigating the association of electrically-evoked compound action potential thresholds with inner-ear dimensions in pediatric cochlear implantation.

OBJECTIVES: A narrow bony cochlear nerve canal (BCNC), as well as a hypoplastic and aplastic cochlear nerve (CN) have been associated with increased electrically-evoked compound action potential (eCAP) thresholds in some studies, suggesting poorer neural excitability in cochlear implantation. Also, in large cochleae the extent of activated spiral ganglion neurons with electrical stimulation is less than in smaller ones. However, a detailed description of the relationship between eCAP thresholds for a lateral-wall electrode array and dimensions of the inner-ear structures and internal auditory canal (IAC) is missing. DESIGN: The study subjects were 52 pediatric patients with congenital severe-to-profound hearing loss (27 females and 25 males; ages 0.7-2.0 years; 1.0 ± 0.3 years, mean ± SD) implanted bilaterally with Cochlear Nucleus CI422, CI522, or CI622 implants with full insertion of the Slim Straight electrode array. Diameters of the cochlea and the BCNC as well as the widths and heights of the IAC and the CN were evaluated from preoperative computed tomography and magnetic resonance images. These anatomical dimensions were compared with each other and with the patients' intraoperative eCAP thresholds. RESULTS: The eCAP thresholds increased from the apical to basal direction (r = 0.89, p < 0.001). After sorting the cochleae into four size categories, higher eCAP thresholds were found in larger than in smaller cochleae (p < 0.001). With similar categorization, the eCAP thresholds were higher in cochleae with a larger BCNC than in cochleae with a smaller BCNC (p < 0.001). Neither IAC nor CN cross-sectional areas affected the eCAP thresholds. Correlations were found between cochlea and BCNC diameters and between IAC and CN cross-sectional areas (r = 0.39 and r = 0.48, respectively, p < 0.001 for both). CONCLUSIONS: In the basal part of the electrode array, higher stimulation levels to elicit measurable neural responses (eCAP thresholds) were required than in the apical part. Increased eCAP thresholds associated with a larger cochlear diameter, but contrary to the earlier studies, not with a small size of the BCNC or the CN. Instead, the BCNC diameter correlated significantly with the cochlea diameter.

Intraoperative transimpedance and spread of excitation profile correlations with a lateral-wall cochlear implant electrode array.

A limiting factor of cochlear implant technology is the spread of electrode-generated intracochlear electrical field (EF) leading to spread of neural excitation (SOE). In this study, we investigated the relation of the spread of the intracochlear EF, assessed via transimpedance matrix (TIM), and SOE. A total of 43 consecutive patients (ages 0.7-82 years; 31.0 ± 25.7 years, mean ± SD) implanted with a Cochlear Nucleus CI522 or CI622 cochlear implant with Slim Straight electrode array (altogether 51 ears) were included in the study. Cochlear nerve was visualized for all patients in preoperative imaging and there were no cochlear anomalies in the study sample. The stimulated electrodes were in the basal, middle, and apical parts of the electrode array (electrode numbers 6, 11, and 19, respectively). The stimulation level was 210 CL on average for the TIM measurement and always 230 CL for the SOE measurement. Approximately 90% of the individual TIM and SOE profiles correlated with each other (p < .05; r = 0.61-0.99). Also, the widths of the TIM and SOE peaks, computed at 50% of the maximum height, exhibited a weak correlation (r = 0.39, p = .007). The 50% widths of TIM and SOE were the same only in the apical part of the electrode array; in the basal part SOE was wider than TIM, and in the middle part TIM was wider than SOE (p < .01 and p = .048, respectively). Within each measurement, TIM 50% widths were different between all three parts of the electrode array, while for SOE, only the basal electrode differed from the middle electrode. Finally, the size of the cochlea and the 50% widths of TIM and SOE had the strongest correlation in the middle part of the electrode array (r = -0.63, and -0.37, respectively). Our results suggest that there is a correlation between the spread of intracochlear EF and neural SOE at least in the apical part of the electrode array used in this study, and that larger cochleae are associated with more focused TIM and SOE.