Radiologic and Functional Evaluation of Electrode Dislocation from the Scala Tympani to the Scala Vestibuli in Patients with Cochlear Implants

REFERENCES

1. 1.↵
   2. Aschendorff A,
   3. Kromeier J,
   4. Klenzner T, et al

   . Quality control after insertion of the nucleus contour and contour advance electrode in adults. Ear Hear 2007;28:75S–79S

   CrossRefPubMed
2. 2.↵
   2. Blamey P,
   3. Arndt P,
   4. Bergeron F, et al

   . Factors affecting auditory performance of postlinguistically deaf adults using cochlear implants. Audiol Neurootol 1996;1:293–306

   CrossRefPubMed
3. 3.↵
   2. Blamey P,
   3. Artieres F,
   4. Baskent D, et al

   . Factors affecting auditory performance of postlinguistically deaf adults using cochlear implants: an update with 2251 patients. Audiol Neurootol 2013;18:36–47

   CrossRefPubMed
4. 4.↵
   2. Finley CC,
   3. Holden TA,
   4. Holden LK, et al

   . Role of electrode placement as a contributor to variability in cochlear implant outcomes. Otol Neurotol 2008;29:920–28

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
5. 5.↵
   2. van Wermeskerken GK,
   3. van Olphen AF,
   4. Graamans K

   . Imaging of electrode position in relation to electrode functioning after cochlear implantation. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2009;266:1527–31

   CrossRefPubMed
6. 6.↵
   2. Wilson BS,
   3. Dorman MF

   . Cochlear implants: a remarkable past and a brilliant future. Hear Res 2008;242:3–21

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
7. 7.↵
   2. Fu QJ,
   3. Galvin JJ 3rd.

   . Perceptual learning and auditory training in cochlear implant recipients. Trends Amplif 2007;11:193–205

   CrossRefPubMed
8. 8.↵
   2. Esquia Medina GN,
   3. Borel S,
   4. Nguyen Y, et al

   . Is electrode-modiolus distance a prognostic factor for hearing performances after cochlear implant surgery? Audiol Neurootol 2013;18:406–13

   CrossRefPubMed
9. 9.↵
   2. Rajan GP,
   3. Kontorinis G,
   4. Kuthubutheen J

   . The effects of insertion speed on inner ear function during cochlear implantation: a comparison study. Audiol Neurootol 2013;18:17–22

   CrossRefPubMed
10. 10.↵
    2. Tamir S,
    3. Ferrary E,
    4. Borel S, et al

    . Hearing preservation after cochlear implantation using deeply inserted flex atraumatic electrode arrays. Audiol Neurootol 2012;17:331–37

    CrossRefPubMed
11. 11.↵
    2. Marx M,
    3. Risi F,
    4. Escude B, et al

    . Reliability of cone beam computed tomography in scalar localization of the electrode array: a radio histological study. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2014;271:673–79

    CrossRefPubMed
12. 12.↵
    2. Shepherd RK,
    3. Hatsushika S,
    4. Clark GM

    . Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve: the effect of electrode position on neural excitation. Hear Res 1993;66:108–20

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
13. 13.↵
    2. Wanna GB,
    3. Noble JH,
    4. McRackan TR, et al

    . Assessment of electrode placement and audiological outcomes in bilateral cochlear implantation. Otol Neurotol 2011;32:428–32

    CrossRefPubMed
14. 14.↵
    2. Adunka O,
    3. Gstoettner W,
    4. Hambek M, et al

    . Preservation of basal inner ear structures in cochlear implantation. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec 2004;66:306–12

    CrossRefPubMed
15. 15.↵
    2. Rebscher SJ,
    3. Hetherington A,
    4. Bonham B, et al

    . Considerations for design of future cochlear implant electrode arrays: electrode array stiffness, size, and depth of insertion. J Rehabil Res Dev 2008;45:731–47

    CrossRefPubMed
16. 16.↵
    2. Cords SM,
    3. Reuter G,
    4. Issing PR, et al

    . A silastic positioner for a modiolus-hugging position of intracochlear electrodes: electrophysiologic effects. Am J Otol 2000;21:212–17

    CrossRefPubMed
17. 17.↵
    2. Dorman MF,
    3. Spahr T,
    4. Gifford R, et al

    . An electric frequency-to-place map for a cochlear implant patient with hearing in the nonimplanted ear. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2007;8:234–40

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    2. Davidson LS,
    3. Skinner MW,
    4. Holstad BA, et al

    . The effect of instantaneous input dynamic range setting on the speech perception of children with the nucleus 24 implant. Ear Hear 2009;30:340–49

    CrossRefPubMed
19. 19.↵
    2. Firszt JB,
    3. Holden LK,
    4. Skinner MW, et al

    . Recognition of speech presented at soft to loud levels by adult cochlear implant recipients of three cochlear implant systems. Ear Hear 2004;25:375–87

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
20. 20.↵
    2. Holden LK,
    3. Finley CC,
    4. Firszt JB, et al

    . Factors affecting open-set word recognition in adults with cochlear implants. Ear Hear 2013;34:342–60

    CrossRefPubMed
21. 21.↵
    2. Güldner C,
    3. Wiegand S,
    4. Weiss R, et al

    . Artifacts of the electrode in cochlea implantation and limits in analysis of deep insertion in cone beam tomography (CBT). Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2012;269:767–72

    CrossRefPubMed
22. 22.↵
    2. Lane JI,
    3. Witte RJ,
    4. Driscoll CL, et al

    . Scalar localization of the electrode array after cochlear implantation: clinical experience using 64-slice multidetector computed tomography. Otol Neurotol 2007;28:658–62

    PubMed
23. 23.↵
    2. Ruivo J,
    3. Mermuys K,
    4. Bacher K, et al

    . Cone beam computed tomography, a low-dose imaging technique in the postoperative assessment of cochlear implantation. Otol Neurotol 2009;30:299–303

    CrossRefPubMed