Skip to main content
Top
Published in:

Open Access 03-01-2024 | Cochlear Implant | Otology

Two different methods to digitally visualize continuous electrocochleography potentials during cochlear implantation: a first description of feasibility

Authors: Theda Eichler, Antonia Lakomek, Laura Waschkies, Moritz Meyer, Nadia Sadok, Stephan Lang, Diana Arweiler-Harbeck

Published in: European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology | Issue 6/2024

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

The study explores the potential of real-time electrocochleographic potentials (ECochG) visualization during electrode insertion using digital microscopes such as RoboticScope (BHS®). Collaborative software development of the MAESTRO Software (MED-EL®) offers continuous ECochG monitoring during implantation and postoperative hearing evaluation, addressing previous time constraints. The study aims to assess software applicability and the impact of real-time visualization on long-term residual hearing preservation.

Methods

Eight patients with residual hearing underwent cochlear implantation with Flex26 or Flex28 electrode according to the Otoplan evaluation. ECochG responses were measured and visualized during electrode insertion, with insertion times recorded. Two randomized display methods (graph and arrows) tracked ECochG potentials. Postoperative behavioral thresholds determined hearing preservation. Successful real-time intraoperative ECochG visualization was achieved in all cases, enabling surgeon adaptation. Mean electrode insertion time was 114 s, with postoperative thresholds comparable to preoperative values. Visualization did not affect surgeon workload. ECochG amplitudes differed between patients with and without residual hearing.

Conclusion

The study demonstrates effective implementation of advanced ECochG software combined with real-time visualization, enabling residual hearing preservation during CI. Visualization had no apparent effect on surgeon performance or workload. Future investigation involving a larger population will assess the long-term impact of ECochG on hearing threshold and structure preservation.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Gifford RH, Dorman MF, Skarzynski H, Lorens A, Polak M, Driscoll CLW et al (2013) Cochlear implantation with hearing preservation yields significant benefit for speech recognition in complex listening environments. Ear Hear 34:413–425CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Gifford RH, Dorman MF, Skarzynski H, Lorens A, Polak M, Driscoll CLW et al (2013) Cochlear implantation with hearing preservation yields significant benefit for speech recognition in complex listening environments. Ear Hear 34:413–425CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
go back to reference Dunn CC, Perreau A, Gantz B, Tyler RS (2010) Benefits of localization and speech perception with multiple noise sources in listeners with a short-electrode cochlear implant. J Am Acad Audiol 21:44–51CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Dunn CC, Perreau A, Gantz B, Tyler RS (2010) Benefits of localization and speech perception with multiple noise sources in listeners with a short-electrode cochlear implant. J Am Acad Audiol 21:44–51CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
go back to reference Yüksel M, Meredith MA, Rubinstein JT (2019) Effects of low frequency residual hearing on music perception and psychoacoustic abilities in pediatric cochlear implant recipients. Front Neurosci 13:924CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Yüksel M, Meredith MA, Rubinstein JT (2019) Effects of low frequency residual hearing on music perception and psychoacoustic abilities in pediatric cochlear implant recipients. Front Neurosci 13:924CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
6.
go back to reference Balkany TJ, Connell SS, Hodges AV, Payne SL, Telischi FF, Eshraghi AA et al (2006) Conservation of residual acoustic hearing after cochlear implantation. Otol Neurotol 27:1083–1088CrossRefPubMed Balkany TJ, Connell SS, Hodges AV, Payne SL, Telischi FF, Eshraghi AA et al (2006) Conservation of residual acoustic hearing after cochlear implantation. Otol Neurotol 27:1083–1088CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Hunter JB, Gifford RH, Wanna GB, Labadie RF, Bennett ML, Haynes DS et al (2016) Hearing preservation outcomes with a mid-scala electrode in cochlear implantation. Otol Neurotol 37:235–240CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Hunter JB, Gifford RH, Wanna GB, Labadie RF, Bennett ML, Haynes DS et al (2016) Hearing preservation outcomes with a mid-scala electrode in cochlear implantation. Otol Neurotol 37:235–240CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
go back to reference Moran M, Dowell RC, Iseli C, Briggs RJS (2017) Hearing preservation outcomes for 139 cochlear implant recipients using a thin straight electrode array. Otol Neurotol 38:678–684CrossRefPubMed Moran M, Dowell RC, Iseli C, Briggs RJS (2017) Hearing preservation outcomes for 139 cochlear implant recipients using a thin straight electrode array. Otol Neurotol 38:678–684CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Nguyen Y, Mosnier I, Borel S, Ambert-Dahan E, Bouccara D, Bozorg-Grayeli A et al (2013) Evolution of electrode array diameter for hearing preservation in cochlear implantation. Acta Otolaryngol 133:116–122CrossRefPubMed Nguyen Y, Mosnier I, Borel S, Ambert-Dahan E, Bouccara D, Bozorg-Grayeli A et al (2013) Evolution of electrode array diameter for hearing preservation in cochlear implantation. Acta Otolaryngol 133:116–122CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Gantz BJ, Dunn C, Oleson J, Hansen M, Parkinson A, Turner C (2016) Multicenter clinical trial of the Nucleus Hybrid S8 cochlear implant: Final outcomes. Laryngoscope 126:962–973CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Gantz BJ, Dunn C, Oleson J, Hansen M, Parkinson A, Turner C (2016) Multicenter clinical trial of the Nucleus Hybrid S8 cochlear implant: Final outcomes. Laryngoscope 126:962–973CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
go back to reference Dhanasingh A (2021) The rationale for FLEX (cochlear implant) electrode with varying array lengths. World J Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg 7:45–53CrossRefPubMed Dhanasingh A (2021) The rationale for FLEX (cochlear implant) electrode with varying array lengths. World J Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg 7:45–53CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Ketterer MC, Aschendorff A, Arndt S, Hassepass F, Wesarg T, Laszig R et al (2018) The influence of cochlear morphology on the final electrode array position. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 275:385–394CrossRefPubMed Ketterer MC, Aschendorff A, Arndt S, Hassepass F, Wesarg T, Laszig R et al (2018) The influence of cochlear morphology on the final electrode array position. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 275:385–394CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference O’Leary S, Briggs R, Gerard J-M, Iseli C, Wei BPC, Tari S et al (2020) Intraoperative Observational Real-time Electrocochleography as a Predictor of Hearing Loss After Cochlear Implantation: 3 and 12 Month Outcomes. Otol Neurotol 41:1222–1229CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral O’Leary S, Briggs R, Gerard J-M, Iseli C, Wei BPC, Tari S et al (2020) Intraoperative Observational Real-time Electrocochleography as a Predictor of Hearing Loss After Cochlear Implantation: 3 and 12 Month Outcomes. Otol Neurotol 41:1222–1229CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
go back to reference Barnes JH, Yin LX, Saoji AA, Carlson ML (2021) Electrocochleography in cochlear implantation: Development, applications, and future directions. World J Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg 7:94–100CrossRefPubMed Barnes JH, Yin LX, Saoji AA, Carlson ML (2021) Electrocochleography in cochlear implantation: Development, applications, and future directions. World J Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg 7:94–100CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Lo J, Bester C, Collins A, Newbold C, Hampson A, Chambers S et al (2018) Intraoperative force and electrocochleography measurements in an animal model of cochlear implantation. Hear Res 358:50–58CrossRefPubMed Lo J, Bester C, Collins A, Newbold C, Hampson A, Chambers S et al (2018) Intraoperative force and electrocochleography measurements in an animal model of cochlear implantation. Hear Res 358:50–58CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference O’Leary S, Mylanus E, Venail F, Lenarz T, Birman C, Di Lella F et al (2023) Monitoring Cochlear Health With Intracochlear Electrocochleography During Cochlear Implantation: Findings From an International Clinical Investigation. Ear Hear 44:358–370CrossRefPubMed O’Leary S, Mylanus E, Venail F, Lenarz T, Birman C, Di Lella F et al (2023) Monitoring Cochlear Health With Intracochlear Electrocochleography During Cochlear Implantation: Findings From an International Clinical Investigation. Ear Hear 44:358–370CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Giardina CK, Brown KD, Adunka OF, Buchman CA, Hutson KA, Pillsbury HC et al (2019) Intracochlear Electrocochleography: Response Patterns During Cochlear Implantation and Hearing Preservation. Ear Hear 40:833–848CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Giardina CK, Brown KD, Adunka OF, Buchman CA, Hutson KA, Pillsbury HC et al (2019) Intracochlear Electrocochleography: Response Patterns During Cochlear Implantation and Hearing Preservation. Ear Hear 40:833–848CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
go back to reference O’Connell BP, Holder JT, Dwyer RT, Gifford RH, Noble JH, Bennett ML et al (2017) Intra- and Postoperative Electrocochleography May Be Predictive of Final Electrode Position and Postoperative Hearing Preservation. Front Neurosci 11:291CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral O’Connell BP, Holder JT, Dwyer RT, Gifford RH, Noble JH, Bennett ML et al (2017) Intra- and Postoperative Electrocochleography May Be Predictive of Final Electrode Position and Postoperative Hearing Preservation. Front Neurosci 11:291CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
19.
go back to reference Schuerch K, Waser M, Mantokoudis G, Anschuetz L, Wimmer W, Caversaccio M, et al. Performing Intracochlear Electrocochleography During Cochlear Implantation. J Vis Exp 2022. Schuerch K, Waser M, Mantokoudis G, Anschuetz L, Wimmer W, Caversaccio M, et al. Performing Intracochlear Electrocochleography During Cochlear Implantation. J Vis Exp 2022.
20.
go back to reference Arweiler-Harbeck D, D'heygere V, Meyer M, Hans S, Waschkies L, Lang S, et al. Digital Live Imaging of Intraoperative Electrocochleography - First Description of Feasibility and Hearing Preservation During Cochlear Implantation. Otol Neurotol 2021; 42:1342–1346. Arweiler-Harbeck D, D'heygere V, Meyer M, Hans S, Waschkies L, Lang S, et al. Digital Live Imaging of Intraoperative Electrocochleography - First Description of Feasibility and Hearing Preservation During Cochlear Implantation. Otol Neurotol 2021; 42:1342–1346.
21.
go back to reference Hart SG. PsycEXTRA Dataset: American Psychological Association (APA); 2006. Hart SG. PsycEXTRA Dataset: American Psychological Association (APA); 2006.
22.
go back to reference Pfendler C. Zur Messung der mentalen Beanspruchung mit dem NASA-Task Load Index; 1990. Pfendler C. Zur Messung der mentalen Beanspruchung mit dem NASA-Task Load Index; 1990.
23.
go back to reference Hancock PA, Najmedin Meshkati E. Human mental workload. Advances in psychology 1988:XVI-382. Hancock PA, Najmedin Meshkati E. Human mental workload. Advances in psychology 1988:XVI-382.
24.
go back to reference Harris MS, Riggs WJ, Giardina CK, O’Connell BP, Holder JT, Dwyer RT et al (2017) Patterns Seen During Electrode Insertion Using Intracochlear Electrocochleography Obtained Directly Through a Cochlear Implant. Otol Neurotol 38:1415–1420CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Harris MS, Riggs WJ, Giardina CK, O’Connell BP, Holder JT, Dwyer RT et al (2017) Patterns Seen During Electrode Insertion Using Intracochlear Electrocochleography Obtained Directly Through a Cochlear Implant. Otol Neurotol 38:1415–1420CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
25.
go back to reference Vittoria S, Lahlou G, Torres R, Daoudi H, Mosnier I, Mazalaigue S et al (2021) Robot-based assistance in middle ear surgery and cochlear implantation: first clinical report. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 278:77–85CrossRefPubMed Vittoria S, Lahlou G, Torres R, Daoudi H, Mosnier I, Mazalaigue S et al (2021) Robot-based assistance in middle ear surgery and cochlear implantation: first clinical report. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 278:77–85CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Kelsall, David, J. Eric Lupo, and Rocky Mountain Ear Center. Early Clinical Experience with the Cochlear™ Nucleus® SmartNav System: Real-time Surgical Insights. Kelsall, David, J. Eric Lupo, and Rocky Mountain Ear Center. Early Clinical Experience with the Cochlear™ Nucleus® SmartNav System: Real-time Surgical Insights.
27.
go back to reference Strenger T, Costian N, Ortolf E, Meyermann S, Zenk J. First Experiences with the Cochlear Nucleus SmartNav System: Abstract for DGHNO KHC. Laryngo-Rhino-Otologie 2023. Strenger T, Costian N, Ortolf E, Meyermann S, Zenk J. First Experiences with the Cochlear Nucleus SmartNav System: Abstract for DGHNO KHC. Laryngo-Rhino-Otologie 2023.
28.
go back to reference Höing B, Eichler T, Juelly V, Meyer M, Jung L, Waschkies L, et al. Digital live imaging of intraoperative electrocochleography during cochlear implantation: the first 50 patients. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2023. Höing B, Eichler T, Juelly V, Meyer M, Jung L, Waschkies L, et al. Digital live imaging of intraoperative electrocochleography during cochlear implantation: the first 50 patients. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2023.
29.
go back to reference Ramos-Macias A, O’Leary S, Ramos-deMiguel A, Bester C, Falcon-González JC (2019) Intraoperative Intracochlear Electrocochleography and Residual Hearing Preservation Outcomes When Using Two Types of Slim Electrode Arrays in Cochlear Implantation. Otol Neurotol 40:S29–S37CrossRefPubMed Ramos-Macias A, O’Leary S, Ramos-deMiguel A, Bester C, Falcon-González JC (2019) Intraoperative Intracochlear Electrocochleography and Residual Hearing Preservation Outcomes When Using Two Types of Slim Electrode Arrays in Cochlear Implantation. Otol Neurotol 40:S29–S37CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference Koka K, Riggs WJ, Dwyer R, Holder JT, Noble JH, Dawant BM et al (2018) Intra-Cochlear Electrocochleography During Cochear Implant Electrode Insertion Is Predictive of Final Scalar Location. Otol Neurotol 39:e654–e659CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Koka K, Riggs WJ, Dwyer R, Holder JT, Noble JH, Dawant BM et al (2018) Intra-Cochlear Electrocochleography During Cochear Implant Electrode Insertion Is Predictive of Final Scalar Location. Otol Neurotol 39:e654–e659CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
31.
go back to reference Trecca EMC, Adunka OF, Mattingly JK, Hiss MM, Cassano M, Malhotra PS et al (2021) Electrocochleography Observations in a Series of Cochlear Implant Electrode Tip Fold-Overs. Otol Neurotol 42:e433–e437CrossRefPubMed Trecca EMC, Adunka OF, Mattingly JK, Hiss MM, Cassano M, Malhotra PS et al (2021) Electrocochleography Observations in a Series of Cochlear Implant Electrode Tip Fold-Overs. Otol Neurotol 42:e433–e437CrossRefPubMed
32.
go back to reference Koka K, Saoji AA, Litvak LM (2017) Electrocochleography in Cochlear Implant Recipients With Residual Hearing: Comparison With Audiometric Thresholds. Ear Hear 38:e161–e167CrossRefPubMed Koka K, Saoji AA, Litvak LM (2017) Electrocochleography in Cochlear Implant Recipients With Residual Hearing: Comparison With Audiometric Thresholds. Ear Hear 38:e161–e167CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Two different methods to digitally visualize continuous electrocochleography potentials during cochlear implantation: a first description of feasibility
Authors
Theda Eichler
Antonia Lakomek
Laura Waschkies
Moritz Meyer
Nadia Sadok
Stephan Lang
Diana Arweiler-Harbeck
Publication date
03-01-2024
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology / Issue 6/2024
Print ISSN: 0937-4477
Electronic ISSN: 1434-4726
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-023-08400-3