287 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31011800)
1. CT-scan contouring technique allows for direct and reliable measurements of the cochlear duct length: implication in cochlear implantation with straight electrode-arrays.
Vu TH; Perazzini C; Puechmaille M; Bachy A; Mulliez A; Boyer L; Mom T; Gabrillargues J
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol; 2019 Aug; 276(8):2135-2140. PubMed ID: 31011800
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. An Accurate and Individualized Preoperative Estimation Method for the Linear Insertion Depth of Cochlear Implant Electrode Arrays Based on Computed Tomography.
Jia G; Song Z; Wu L; Sun Q; Sheng Y; Ni Y; Li H; Li W
Ear Hear; 2023 Sep-Oct 01; 44(5):1036-1042. PubMed ID: 36864593
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Automatic Cochlear Duct Length Estimation for Selection of Cochlear Implant Electrode Arrays.
Rivas A; Cakir A; Hunter JB; Labadie RF; Zuniga MG; Wanna GB; Dawant BM; Noble JH
Otol Neurotol; 2017 Mar; 38(3):339-346. PubMed ID: 28146009
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Scalar localization by cone-beam computed tomography of cochlear implant carriers: a comparative study between straight and periomodiolar precurved electrode arrays.
Boyer E; Karkas A; Attye A; Lefournier V; Escude B; Schmerber S
Otol Neurotol; 2015 Mar; 36(3):422-9. PubMed ID: 25575374
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. An overview of cochlear implant electrode array designs.
Dhanasingh A; Jolly C
Hear Res; 2017 Dec; 356():93-103. PubMed ID: 29102129
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Cone beam computed tomography and histological evaluations of a straight electrode array positioning in temporal bones.
Mosnier I; Célérier C; Bensimon JL; de Seta D; Sterkers O; Nguyen Y; Bernardeschi D
Acta Otolaryngol; 2017 Mar; 137(3):229-234. PubMed ID: 28225319
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Cone beam CT for perioperative imaging in hearing preservation Cochlear implantation - a human cadaveric study.
Nateghifard K; Low D; Awofala L; Srikanthan D; Kuthubutheen J; Daly M; Chan H; Irish J; Chen J; Lin V; Le TN
J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg; 2019 Nov; 48(1):65. PubMed ID: 31753027
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The influence of cochlear morphology on the final electrode array position.
Ketterer MC; Aschendorff A; Arndt S; Hassepass F; Wesarg T; Laszig R; Beck R
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol; 2018 Feb; 275(2):385-394. PubMed ID: 29242990
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. CT and MR imaging cochlear distance measurements may predict cochlear implant length required for a 360 degrees insertion.
Connor SE; Bell DJ; O'Gorman R; Fitzgerald-O'Connor A
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol; 2009 Aug; 30(7):1425-30. PubMed ID: 19386728
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Surgical approach for complete cochlear coverage in EAS-patients after residual hearing loss.
Weiss NM; Dhanasingh A; Schraven SP; Schulze M; Langner S; Mlynski R
PLoS One; 2019; 14(9):e0223121. PubMed ID: 31557251
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Preliminary Results With Image-guided Cochlear Implant Insertion Techniques.
Labadie RF; Noble JH
Otol Neurotol; 2018 Aug; 39(7):922-928. PubMed ID: 29995013
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. In vivo estimates of the position of advanced bionics electrode arrays in the human cochlea.
Skinner MW; Holden TA; Whiting BR; Voie AH; Brunsden B; Neely JG; Saxon EA; Hullar TE; Finley CC
Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl; 2007 Apr; 197():2-24. PubMed ID: 17542465
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Atraumaticity study of 2 cochlear implant electrode arrays.
Manrique M; Picciafuoco S; Manrique R; Sanhueza I; Domínguez P; Pérez N; Zubieta JL; de Abajo J
Otol Neurotol; 2014 Apr; 35(4):619-28. PubMed ID: 24569795
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. CT imaging-based approaches to cochlear duct length estimation-a human temporal bone study.
Breitsprecher T; Dhanasingh A; Schulze M; Kipp M; Dakah RA; Oberhoffner T; Dau M; Frerich B; Weber MA; Langner S; Mlynski R; Weiss NM
Eur Radiol; 2022 Feb; 32(2):1014-1023. PubMed ID: 34463797
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Development of Insertion Models Predicting Cochlear Implant Electrode Position.
van der Marel KS; Briaire JJ; Wolterbeek R; Verbist BM; Frijns JH
Ear Hear; 2016; 37(4):473-82. PubMed ID: 26760199
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Optimal electrode diameter in relation to volume of the cochlea.
Gnansia D; Demarcy T; Vandersteen C; Raffaelli C; Guevara N; Delingette H; Ayache N
Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis; 2016 Jun; 133 Suppl 1():S66-7. PubMed ID: 27246746
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of Skull Radiograph and Computed Tomography Measurements of Cochlear Implant Insertion Angles.
Gallant S; Friedmann DR; Hagiwara M; Roland JT; Svirsky MA; Jethanamest D
Otol Neurotol; 2019 Mar; 40(3):e298-e303. PubMed ID: 30741910
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Optimal electrode length to match patient specific cochlear anatomy.
Mistrík P; Jolly C
Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis; 2016 Jun; 133 Suppl 1():S68-71. PubMed ID: 27246743
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Anatomically and mechanically accurate scala tympani model for electrode insertion studies.
Starovoyt A; Shaheen E; Putzeys T; Kerckhofs G; Politis C; Wouters J; Verhaert N
Hear Res; 2023 Mar; 430():108707. PubMed ID: 36773540
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Dynamic Behavior and Insertional Forces of a Precurved Electrode Using the Pull-Back Technique in a Fresh Microdissected Cochlea.
Smetak MR; Riojas KE; Whittenbarger N; Noble JH; Labadie RF
Otol Neurotol; 2023 Apr; 44(4):324-330. PubMed ID: 36728107
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
