Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T13:28:05.246Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The surgical anatomy for multiple-electrode extracochlear implant operations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 June 2007

Burkhard K-H. G. Franz  and
Graeme M. Clark
Burkhard K-H. G. Franz*
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, University of Melbourne, The Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne 3002, Australia.
Graeme M. Clark
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, University of Melbourne, The Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne 3002, Australia.
*
Department of Otolaryngology, University of Melbourne, The Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne St., East Melbourne, Australia.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Direct access to the whole length of the cochlear turns via endaural middle ear approach for the placement of extracochlear electrodes is severely restricted. Approximately 10 mm. of the cochlear turns are accessible, being less than a third of their length. The middle cranial fossa, the facial nerve, the internal carotid artery and the temporomandibular joint restrict the access. A further restriction is caused by the position of the cochlea and the direction of its axis. The anterior part of the cochlea lies anterior to the tympanic membrane and medial to the temporomandibular joint, thus limiting an endaural approach to a posterolateral direction. Despite this limitation small sections of the basal, middle and apical turns of the cochlea can be reached.

Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 102 , Issue 8 , August 1988 , pp. 685 - 688
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Banfai, P., Hartmann, G., Kubik, S., and Wustrow, F. (1980) Projection of the spiral cochlear canal on the medial wall of the tympanic cavity with regard to the cochlear implant. Scandinavian Audiology Supplement, 11: 157–162.Google Scholar
Banfai, P., Kubik, S. and Hartmann, G. (1984) Our extrascalar operating method of cochlear implantation. Acta Otolaryngologica, Supplement, 411: 9–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Banfai, P., Karczag, A., Kubik, S., Luers, P. and Suerth, W. (1986) Sixteen channel extracochlear electrode stimulation of the auditory nerve with programmable speech processor. International Conference on: Controversies in Otology and Otoneurosurgery, Alghero.Google Scholar
Black, R.C., Clark, G.M., Tong, Y.C., and Patrick, J.F. (1983) Current distribution in cochlear stimulation. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 405: 137–145.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clark, G.M. (1975) A surgical approach for the cochlear implant: an anatomical study. Journal of Laryngology and Otology, 89: 9–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gantz, B.J., Mccabe, B.F., Tyler, R.S. and Preece, J.P. (1987) Evaluation of four cochlear implant designs. Annals of Otology, Rhinology and laryngology, Supplement 128: 145–147.Google Scholar
Kubik, S. (1984) Anatomy of possible approaches for cochlear implant. Advances in Audiology, 2: 108–112.Google Scholar
Pulec, J. (1986) Advantages of the transcutaneous eight channel extracochlear implants. International Conference on: Controversies in Otology and Otoneurosurgery, Alghero.Google Scholar
Schuknecht, H. (1974) Pathology of the ear. Harvard University press.Google Scholar