Blinded comparison of computed tomography, ultrasound and needle methods to measure skin flap thickness for cochlear implantation.

IF 1.4 Q2 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY COCHLEAR IMPLANTS INTERNATIONAL Pub Date : 2023-11-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-23 DOI:10.1080/14670100.2023.2239515
Rohma Abrar, Unai Martinez de Estibariz, Elizabeth Whittle, Sarah Hornby, Martin O'Driscoll, Simon Freeman, Emma Stapleton
{"title":"Blinded comparison of computed tomography, ultrasound and needle methods to measure skin flap thickness for cochlear implantation.","authors":"Rohma Abrar, Unai Martinez de Estibariz, Elizabeth Whittle, Sarah Hornby, Martin O'Driscoll, Simon Freeman, Emma Stapleton","doi":"10.1080/14670100.2023.2239515","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Patient suitability for cochlear implant (CI) devices compatible with magnetic resonance imaging and CI processor configuration is dependent on their retro-auricular skin flap thickness. This is typically measured intra-operatively using a needle and therefore patients are not guaranteed their implant of choice prior to surgery. We aimed to identify an accurate method to measure skin flap thickness pre-operatively to streamline CI selection and simplify the consent process.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Blinded prospective skin flap thickness measurements for patients undergoing CI surgery were recorded using pre-operative computed tomography (CT) and ultrasound (US), and intraoperative needle measurement.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty-six adult patients (36 females, 20 males; mean age 59 years) were included. The mean flap thickness was measured highest by CT (6.9 mm, 95% CI 6.5-7.3 mm), followed by US (6.3 mm, 95% CI 5.9-6.7 mm) and lastly needle (5.5 mm, 95% CI 5.1-5.9 mm) (<i>p</i> < 0.0001). A strong positive correlation (<i>p</i> < 0.001) was noted between all three modalities: CT vs needle (<i>r</i> = 0.869), US vs needle (<i>r</i> = 0.865), and CT vs US (<i>r</i> = 0.849).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Accurate, non-invasive measurement of skin flap thickness prior to CI surgery can be achieved using CT or US. We recommend the routine use of US in the outpatient clinic to minimise unnecessary radiation exposure.</p>","PeriodicalId":53553,"journal":{"name":"COCHLEAR IMPLANTS INTERNATIONAL","volume":" ","pages":"295-300"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"COCHLEAR IMPLANTS INTERNATIONAL","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14670100.2023.2239515","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Patient suitability for cochlear implant (CI) devices compatible with magnetic resonance imaging and CI processor configuration is dependent on their retro-auricular skin flap thickness. This is typically measured intra-operatively using a needle and therefore patients are not guaranteed their implant of choice prior to surgery. We aimed to identify an accurate method to measure skin flap thickness pre-operatively to streamline CI selection and simplify the consent process.

Methods: Blinded prospective skin flap thickness measurements for patients undergoing CI surgery were recorded using pre-operative computed tomography (CT) and ultrasound (US), and intraoperative needle measurement.

Results: Fifty-six adult patients (36 females, 20 males; mean age 59 years) were included. The mean flap thickness was measured highest by CT (6.9 mm, 95% CI 6.5-7.3 mm), followed by US (6.3 mm, 95% CI 5.9-6.7 mm) and lastly needle (5.5 mm, 95% CI 5.1-5.9 mm) (p < 0.0001). A strong positive correlation (p < 0.001) was noted between all three modalities: CT vs needle (r = 0.869), US vs needle (r = 0.865), and CT vs US (r = 0.849).

Conclusion: Accurate, non-invasive measurement of skin flap thickness prior to CI surgery can be achieved using CT or US. We recommend the routine use of US in the outpatient clinic to minimise unnecessary radiation exposure.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
人工耳蜗植入术中ct、超声和针刺测量皮瓣厚度的盲法比较。
目的:患者是否适合与磁共振成像和CI处理器配置兼容的人工耳蜗(CI)设备取决于其耳后皮瓣的厚度。这通常是术中使用针头测量的,因此患者在手术前不能保证他们选择的植入物。我们的目的是确定一种准确的方法来测量皮瓣厚度术前,以简化CI选择和简化同意过程。方法:采用术前计算机断层扫描(CT)和超声(US)以及术中针头测量对CI手术患者进行盲法前瞻性皮瓣厚度测量。结果:成人患者56例,其中女性36例,男性20例;平均年龄59岁)。CT测量皮瓣平均厚度最高(6.9 mm, 95% CI 6.5-7.3 mm),其次是US (6.3 mm, 95% CI 5.9-6.7 mm),最后是针(5.5 mm, 95% CI 5.1-5.9 mm) (p p r = 0.869), US vs needle (r = 0.865), CT vs US (r = 0.849)。结论:在CI手术前使用CT或US可以准确、无创地测量皮瓣厚度。我们建议在门诊常规使用US,以尽量减少不必要的辐射暴露。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
COCHLEAR IMPLANTS INTERNATIONAL
COCHLEAR IMPLANTS INTERNATIONAL Medicine-Otorhinolaryngology
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
期刊介绍: Cochlear Implants International was founded as an interdisciplinary, peer-reviewed journal in response to the growing number of publications in the field of cochlear implants. It was designed to meet a need to include scientific contributions from all the disciplines that are represented in cochlear implant teams: audiology, medicine and surgery, speech therapy and speech pathology, psychology, hearing therapy, radiology, pathology, engineering and acoustics, teaching, and communication. The aim was to found a truly interdisciplinary journal, representing the full breadth of the field of cochlear implantation.
期刊最新文献
Audiological profile in children with congenital inner ear anomalies. The effect of current amplitude and multi-electrode stimulation on eSRT for auditory fitting in cochlear implants with pulse-width loudness coding. The relationship between AutoNRT thresholds and subjective programming levels revisited. Translation and validation of the Hearing Environments and Reflection on Quality of Life (HEAR-QL) questionnaire for preschool children in Dutch. Cochlear reimplantation rate, causes, and outcomes: a multicenter study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1