본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

와우축을 감싸는 가는 전극을 가진 CI532 기기를 이용한 인공와우 수술의 단기 경험: 기존의 기기와의 비교

Short-Term Experience in Cochlear Implantation with Slim Modiolar Electrode Array (CI532): Comparison to Previous Devices

이지연|강우석|김예리|정종우|안중호|박홍주|곽민영|박진택
대한이비인후과학회 (Korean Society of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery)|2021.04|대한이비인후과학회지 두경부외과학 (Korean Journal of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery)|제64권 제4호|pp. 223-231|DOI https://doi.org/10.3342/kjorl-hns.2019.00745

2

조회

0

다운로드

0

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

DeafnessPerceptionHearing lossElectrodesCochlear implantSpeech.
주제분류이비인후과학

초록

Background and Objectives There have been no reports in Korea regarding cochlear implantsurgeries using Cochlear Nucleus Profile Slim Modiolar electrode [CI532 (Cochlear Ltd.)],as it has been recently released in Korea. We aimed to investigate the short-term results of CI532and compare them with previous devices with perimodiolar or straight electrodes arrays fromthe same manufacturer. Subjects and Method From August 2018 to July 2019, 52 patients (26 adults; 26 children)who underwent cochlear implantation of CI532 were included. The intraoperative impedanceand evoked compound action potential (ECAP) threshold in each electrode were analyzed andcompared with the devices with a perimodiolar electrode array [Contour Advance® (CochlearLtd.)] and a lateral wall electrode array [CI422 and CI522 (Cochlear Ltd.)]. Postoperative changesof hearing thresholds at each frequency (250, 500, and 1000 Hz) and aided word recognitionscores (WRS) were also compared. Results CI532 showed significantly lower intraoperative impedance in the basal regionscompared to the lateral wall electrode array. The ECAP thresholds of CI532 in the apical electrodeswere significantly lower than that in the other two groups. After implantation, CI532showed a significant preservation of hearing thresholds at most frequencies and showed significantlyhigher preservation rates than the other electrodes. However, there was no differencebetween the three groups regarding the postoperative short-term aided WRS. Conclusion CI532 showed lower intraoperative impedances and ECAP thresholds, and bettershort-term hearing preservation outcomes compared to the other electrodes, suggesting thatCI532 electrode might be a better option with less traumatic insertion. However, there was nosignificant difference in the aided WRS, and further studies with a longer follow-up are necessaryto examine the difference of audiologic outcomes.

Abstract

Background and Objectives There have been no reports in Korea regarding cochlear implantsurgeries using Cochlear Nucleus Profile Slim Modiolar electrode [CI532 (Cochlear Ltd.)],as it has been recently released in Korea. We aimed to investigate the short-term results of CI532and compare them with previous devices with perimodiolar or straight electrodes arrays fromthe same manufacturer. Subjects and Method From August 2018 to July 2019, 52 patients (26 adults; 26 children)who underwent cochlear implantation of CI532 were included. The intraoperative impedanceand evoked compound action potential (ECAP) threshold in each electrode were analyzed andcompared with the devices with a perimodiolar electrode array [Contour Advance® (CochlearLtd.)] and a lateral wall electrode array [CI422 and CI522 (Cochlear Ltd.)]. Postoperative changesof hearing thresholds at each frequency (250, 500, and 1000 Hz) and aided word recognitionscores (WRS) were also compared. Results CI532 showed significantly lower intraoperative impedance in the basal regionscompared to the lateral wall electrode array. The ECAP thresholds of CI532 in the apical electrodeswere significantly lower than that in the other two groups. After implantation, CI532showed a significant preservation of hearing thresholds at most frequencies and showed significantlyhigher preservation rates than the other electrodes. However, there was no differencebetween the three groups regarding the postoperative short-term aided WRS. Conclusion CI532 showed lower intraoperative impedances and ECAP thresholds, and bettershort-term hearing preservation outcomes compared to the other electrodes, suggesting thatCI532 electrode might be a better option with less traumatic insertion. However, there was nosignificant difference in the aided WRS, and further studies with a longer follow-up are necessaryto examine the difference of audiologic outcomes.

참고문헌 (37)

  1. Hey M, "Objective, audiological and quality of life measures with the CI532Slim Modiolar electrode", Cochlear Implants Int, 20(2), pp.80~90 (2019)
  2. Lazard DS, "Pre-, per-and postoperative factors affecting performance of postlinguistically deaf adults using cochlear implants : A new conceptual model over time", PLoS One, 7(11), pp.e48739~ (2012)
  3. 김리석, "인공와우이식 아동의 장기간 청각 수행력의 발달", 대한이비인후-두경부외과학회지, 45(1), pp.18~21 (2002), 대한이비인후과학회
  4. Kim JR, "The relationship between electrically evoked compound action potential and speech perception in CI24RE implant users", Korean J Otorhinolaryngol-Head Neck Surg, 53(8), pp.470~474 (2010)
  5. Lehnhardt E, "Intracochlear placement of cochlear implant electrodes in soft surgery technique", HNO, 41(7), pp.356~359 (1993)
  6. 박세라, "저주파수의 잔존청력이 보존된 부분농 환자에서의 전기 청각 자극 인공와우 1예", 대한이비인후-두경부외과학회지, 55(11), pp.712~716 (2012), 대한이비인후과학회[DOI]
  7. 장정훈, "와우이식술의 예후인자에 대한 최신지견", 대한이비인후-두경부외과학회지, 57(11), pp.738~747 (2014), 대한이비인후과학회[DOI]
  8. Jeong J, "Intraindividual comparison of psychophysical parameters between perimodiolar and lateral-type electrode arrays in patients with bilateral cochlear implants", Otol Neurotol, 36(2), pp.228~234 (2015)
  9. Lathuillière M, "Cone-beam computed tomography in children with cochlear implants : The effect of electrode array position on ECAP", Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol, 92, pp.27~31 (2017)
  10. Wackym PA, "Electrophysiologic effects of placing cochlear implant electrodes in a perimodiolar position in young children", Laryngoscope, 114(1), pp.71~76 (2004)
  11. Patrick JF, "The development of the Nucleus Freedom Cochlear implant system", Trends Amplif, 10(4), pp.175~200 (2006)
  12. Ahn JH, "Facial nerve stimulation after cochlear implantation according to types of Nucleus 24-channel electrode arrays", Acta Otolaryngol, 129(6), pp.588~591 (2009)
  13. Wanna GB, "Impact of electrode design and surgical approach on scalar location and cochlear implant outcomes", Laryngoscope, 124(Suppl 6), pp.S1~S7 (2014)
  14. Kim YR, "Characteristics and pathogenesis of facial nerve stimulation after cochlear implant surgeries : A single-centre retrospective analysis from 1151 patients", Clin Otolaryngol, 43(5), pp.1396~1400 (2018)
  15. Briggs RJ, "Development and evaluation of the modiolar research array--multi-centre collaborative study in human temporal bones", Cochlear Implants Int, 12(3), pp.129~139 (2011)
  16. Park LR, "Audiological outcomes and map characteristics in children with perimodiolar and slim straight array cochlear implants in opposite ears", Otol Neurotol, 38(9), pp.e320~e326 (2017)
  17. McJunkin JL, "Early outcomes with a slim, modiolar cochlear implant electrode array", Otol Neurotol, 39(1), pp.e28~e33 (2018)
  18. van Dijk B, "Clinical results of AutoNRT, a completely automatic ECAP recording system for cochlear implants", Ear Hear, 28(4), pp.558~570 (2007)
  19. Venail F, "Modeling of auditory neuron response thresholds with cochlear implants", Biomed Res Int, 2015, pp.394687~ (2015)
  20. Balkany TJ, "Conservation of residual acoustic hearing after cochlear implantation", Otol Neurotol, 27(8), pp.1083~1088 (2006)
  21. Skarzynski H, "Towards a consensus on a hearing preservation classification system", Acta Otolaryngol Suppl, (564), pp.3~13 (2013)
  22. Aschendorff A, "Clinical investigation of the Nucleus Slim Modiolar electrode", Audiol Neurootol, 22(3), pp.169~179 (2017)
  23. Friedmann DR, "Surgical experience and early outcomes with a slim perimodiolar electrode", Otol Neurotol, 40(3), pp.e304~e310 (2019)
  24. Gordon KA, "From nucleus 24 to 513 : Changing cochlear implant design affects auditory response thresholds", Otol Neurotol, 34(3), pp.436~442 (2013)
  25. Gordin A, "Evolution of cochlear implant arrays result in changes in behavioral and physiological responses in children", Otol Neurotol, 30(7), pp.908~915 (2009)
  26. Perenyi A, "Electrophysiological measurements with electrode types of different perimodiolar properties and the same cochlear implant electronics-a retrospective comparison study", J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 48(1), pp.46~ (2019)
  27. Clark GM, "Cochlear implantation:Osteoneogenesis, electrode-tissue impedance, and residual hearing", Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl, 166, pp.40~42 (1995)
  28. Shaul C, "Electrical impedance as a biomarker for inner ear pathology following lateral wall and peri-modiolar cochlear implantation", Otol Neurotol, 40(5), pp.e518~e526 (2019)
  29. Kawano A, "Intracochlear factors contributing to psychophysical percepts following cochlear implantation", Acta Otolaryngol, 118(3), pp.313~326 (1998)
  30. Nadol JB Jr, "Foreign body or hypersensitivity granuloma of the inner ear after cochlear implantation: One possible cause of a soft failure?", Otol Neurotol, 29(8), pp.1076~1084 (2008)
  31. Cuda D, "Assessment of cochlear trauma and telemetry measures after cochlear implantation : A comparative study between Nucleus®CI512 and CI532 electrode arrays", Audiol Res, 9(1), pp.223~ (2019)
  32. Skarzynski H, "Hearing Preservation Classification", J Hear Sci, 2(2), pp.95~96 (2012)
  33. Ramos-Macías A, "Hearing preservation with the Slim Modiolar Electrode Nucleus CI532®cochlear implant : a preliminary experience", Audiol Neurootol, 22(6), pp.317~325 (2017)
  34. Lenarz T, "Hearing conservation surgery using the Hybrid-L electrode. Results from the first clinical trial at the Medical University of Hannover", Audiol Neurootol, 14(Suppl 1), pp.22~31 (2009)
  35. Gantz BJ, "Multicenter clinical trial of the Nucleus Hybrid S8 cochlear implant : Final outcomes", Laryngoscope, 126(4), pp.962~973 (2016)
  36. Roland JT Jr, "United States multicenter clinical trial of the cochlear nucleus hybrid implant system", Laryngoscope, 126(1), pp.175~181 (2016)
  37. Cuda D, "Cochlear implantation with the Nucleus Slim Modiolar electrode(CI532) : A preliminary experience", Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol, 274(12), pp.4141~4148 (2017)

관련 논문AI추천

한국 성인에서의 Neuro OneⓇ System을 이용한 인공와우이식의 단기 임상결과김민범, 이용우, 장선오대한이비인후과학회 · 대한이비인후과학회지 두경부외과학2018 · 제61권 제6호Effect of Cochlear Implant Electrode Array Design on Electrophysiological and Psychophysical Measures: Lateral Wall versus Perimodiolar Types강시형, 김은연, 문일준, 백은주, 설혜윤, 이지영, 홍성화대한청각학회 · Journal of Audiology & Otology2019 · 제23권 제3호Potential Implications of Slim Modiolar Electrodes for Severely Malformed Cochleae: A Comparison With the Straight Array With Circumferential Electrodes이상연, 최병윤대한이비인후과학회 · Clinical and Experimental Otorhinolaryngology2021 · 제14권 제3호인공와우 조율에서 주파수별 전기자극수준의 변화양상박상헌, 박의현, 임기정, 장지원, 정광진, 탁평곤대한이비인후과학회 · 대한이비인후과학회지 두경부외과학2013 · 제56권 제4호소아 인공와우이식 환자에서의 전기 자극 복합 활동 전위의 역치와 말소리 지각력과의 관계김리석, 김재룡, 신봉식, 우지환, 정성욱대한이비인후과학회 · 대한이비인후과학회지 두경부외과학2011 · 제54권 제10호Can a Narrow Frequency Allocation Improve Speech Perception in Korean Cochlear Implant Users?박의현, 이선욱, 최수정, Chang Jiwon, Im Gi Jung, Park Bongil대한청각학회 · Journal of Audiology & Otology2025 · 제29권 제3호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (3건)

유전성 난청 마우스 모델에서의 내이 유전자 치료최진웅pp. 215-222사람 호흡기 상피세포에서 Ginsenoside RB1이 TGF-β1로 유도된 MUC4/5AC 점액 유전자의 발현과 상피-중간엽 전이에 미치는 효과최태영, 조수연, 이상재, 김용대, 최윤석, 김준희, 송시연, 나형균, 배창훈pp. 232-239후각장애 환자에서의 스테로이드 효과 분석이창배, 김상준pp. 240-246
원문 보기