Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-16T07:27:25.916Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Clarion® cochlear implants: surgical implications

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 June 2007

R. Filipo ,
M. Barbara ,
S. Monini  and
P. Mancini
R. Filipo
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, University of Rome ‘La Sapienza’, 00185 Rome, Italy.
M. Barbara*
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, University of Rome ‘La Sapienza’, 00185 Rome, Italy.
S. Monini
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, University of Rome ‘La Sapienza’, 00185 Rome, Italy.
P. Mancini
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, University of Rome ‘La Sapienza’, 00185 Rome, Italy.
*
Address for correspondence: Maurizio Barbara, M.D., Ph.D., Institute of Otorhinolaryngology, University of Rome ‘La Sapienza’, 00185 Rome, Italy. Fax: +39(6)4454864 e-mail [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The surgical aspects of 34 Clarion® cochlear implants, positioned during a five-year period on 31 profoundly-deaf subjects as primary (11 children, 20 adults) and revision surgery (one child, three adults) were taken into consideration. Intra-and post-operative complications related to the specific structure of this device were considered along with the benefits obtained by update of the hardware and surgical approach. A smaller thickness of the internal receiver as well as the shifting from a retro-auricular/subtemporal (RA-ST) to an endaural-retromastoid (EA-RM) approach have contributed to a dramatic drop in post-operative complications, such as skin defect or device extrusion. Special care should, however, be taken when cochlear implantation is planned in ears with chronic otitis or its surgical sequelae. From the two revised cases (hardware failure, electrode displacement) in whom re-implantation in the same side was performed, it has been demonstrated that the helicoidal shape of the electrode carrier is not inducing any additional trauma to the cohlear structure.

Keywords

Cochlear implantSurgeryReoperationIntraoperative complicationsPost-operative complications
Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 113 , Issue 4 , April 1999 , pp. 321 - 325
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 1999

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

Balkany, T., Telischi, F. F. (1995) Fixation of the electrode cable during cochlear implantation: the split bridge technique. Laryngoscope 105: 217–218.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bigelow, D. C., Kay, D. J., Rafter, K. O., Montes, M., Knox, G. W., Yousem, D. M. (1998) Facial nerve stimulation from cochlear implants. American Journal of Otology 19: 163–169.Google ScholarPubMed
Cohen, N. L., Hoffman, R. A. (1991) Complications of cochlear implant surgery in adults and children. Annals of Otology, Rhinology and Laryngology 100: 708–711.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harris, J. P., Cueva, R. A. (1987) Flap design for cochlear implantation: avoidance of a potential complication. Laryngoscope 97: 755–757.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
House, J. R. D., Luxford, W. M. (1993) Facial nerve injury in cochlear implantation [see comments] Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery 109: 1078–1082.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kempf, H. G., Issing, P. R., Lenarz, T. (1996) Ionomer cement in cochlear implant surgery-applications and long-term outcome. Laryngorhinootologie 75: 388–391.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lalwani, A. K., Larky, J. B., Wareing, M. J., Kwast, K., Schindler, R. A. (1988) The Glarion® multi-strategy cochlear implant—Surgicaltechnique, complications and results: a single institutional experience. American Journal of Otology 19: 66–70.Google Scholar
Muckle, R. P., Levine, S. G. (1994) Facial nerve stimulation produced by cochlear implants in patients with cochlear otosclerosis. American Journal of Otology 15: 394–398.Google ScholarPubMed
Nakajima, H., Imanishi, N., Minabe, T. (1995) The arterial supply of the temporal region and the vascular basis of various temporal flaps. British Journal of Plastic Surgery 48: 439–450.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schindler, R. A., Kessler, D. K. (1992) Preliminary results with the Clarion® cochlear implant Laryngoscope 102: 1006–1013.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schindler, R. A., Kessler, D. K., Barker, (1995) Clarion® patient performance: an update on the clinical trial. Annals of Otology, Rhinology and Laryngology 166: 290–292.Google Scholar
Trabalzini, F., Babighian, G. (1996) Problem in cochlear implant surgery. Acta Otorhinolaryngologica Italica 16: 105–108.Google ScholarPubMed
Webb, R. L., Lehnardt, E., Clark, G. M. (1991) Surgical complications with the cochlear multiple-channel intracochlear implant: experience at Hannover and Melbourne. Annals of Otology, Rhinology and Laryngology 100: 131–136.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Welling, D. B., Hinojosa, R., Gantz, B. J., Lee, J. T. (1993) Insertional trauma of multichannel cochlear implants. Laryngoscope 103: 995–1001.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed