Article thumbnail

The Effect of Pulling Out Cochlear Implant Electrodes on Inner Ear Microstructures: A Temporal Bone Study

By Ingo Todt, Rainer O. Seidl and Arne Ernst


The exchange of an cochlear implant or the re-positioning of an electrode have become more frequently required than a decade ago. The consequences of such procedures at a microstructural level within the cochlea are not known. It was the aim of the present study to further investigate the effects of an CI electrode pull-out. Therefore 10 freshly harvested temporal bones (TB) were histologically evaluated after a cochlear implant electrode pull-out of a perimodiolar electrode. In additional 9 TB the intrascalar movements of the CI electrode while being pulled-out were digitally analysed by video- capturing. Histologically, a disruption of the modiolar wall or the spiral osseous lamina were not observed. In one TB, a basilar membrane lifting up was found, but it could not be undoubtedly attributed to the pull-out of the electrode. When analyzing the temporal sequence of the electrode movement during the pull-out, the electrode turned in one case so that the tip elevates the basilar membrane. The pull- out of perimodiolarly placed CI electrodes does not damage the modiolar wall at a microstructural level and should be guided (e.g., forceps) to prevent a 90 o turning of the electrode tip into the direction of the basilar membrane

Topics: Research Article
Publisher: Hindawi Publishing Corporation
OAI identifier:
Provided by: PubMed Central

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.

Suggested articles


  1. (2005). A temporal bone study of insertion trauma and intracochlear position of cochlear implant electrodes.
  2. (2005). Advanced bionics thin lateral and helix II electrodes: a temporal bone study,”
  3. (1997). Cochlear implant deep electrode insertion: extent of insertional trauma,”
  4. (2006). Combining perimodiolar electrode placement and atraumatic insertion properties in cochlear implantation—fact or fantasy?”
  5. (2003). Comparative study of cochlear damage with three perimodiolar electrode designs,”
  6. (2006). Comparison of roundwindowandcochleostomyapproacheswithaprototype hearing preservation electrode,”
  7. (1991). Electrode insertion trauma in cochlear implantation,”
  8. (2008). Electrophysiological effects of electrode pull-back in cochlear implant surgery,”
  9. (2007). eres, “Cochlear reimplantation: causes of failure, outcomes, and audiologic performance,”
  10. (2004). Evaluation of the inserfion-trauma of theNucleus ContourAdvanceTM electrode-arrayinahuman temporal bone model,”
  11. Evaluation of the temporal bones of a multichannel cochlear implant patient,” Annals of Otology,
  12. (2005). Graurock et al., “Evaluation of the advance off-stylet insertion technique and the cochlear insertion tool in temporal bones,”
  13. (1993). Insertional trauma of multichannel cochlear implants,”
  14. (1992). M a r s h ,H .A .J e n k i n s ,a n dN .J .C o k e r ,“ H i s t o p a t h o l o g y ofthetemporalbonefollowingmultichannelcochlearimplantation,”
  15. (2001). Perimodiolar electrodes in cochlear implant surgery,”
  16. (2007). Radeloff,W .K .G s t o e t t n e r ,H .C .P i l l s b u r y
  17. (2007). Revision surgeries in cochlear implant patients: a review of 45 cases,”
  18. (2005). The “pullback” technique for Nucleus 24 perimodiolar electrode insertion,”