Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32671538›Full record

ArticleEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2021

Evaluation of artifacts of cochlear implant electrodes in cone beam computed tomography.

Nicholas Bevis, Thomas Effertz, Dirk Beutner, Christian Gueldner

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Imaging of the human cochlea using micro-computed tomography before and after cochlear implantation: comparison with cone-beam computed tomography.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2023
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nicholas BevisDepartment of Otolaryngology, University of Goettingen, Robert-Koch-Straße 40, 37075, Goettingen, Germany. nicholas.bevis@med.uni-goettingen.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1667-1365
Thomas EffertzDepartment of Otolaryngology, University of Goettingen, Robert-Koch-Straße 40, 37075, Goettingen, Germany.
Dirk BeutnerDepartment of Otolaryngology, University of Goettingen, Robert-Koch-Straße 40, 37075, Goettingen, Germany.
Christian GueldnerDepartment of Otolaryngology, University of Marburg, 35043, Marburg, Germany.
University of Göttingen · DEPhilipps University of Marburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeCone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) offers a valid alternative to conventional Computed Tomography (CT). A possible radiation dose reduction with the use of CBCT in postoperative imaging of CIs is of great importance. Whether the visualization of Cochlear Implant (CI) electrodes in CBCT correlates with the radiation dose applied was investigated in this study.

methodsWe compared the visualization quality of Contour Advance CIs to Straight CIs from Cochlear using CBCT with varying tube parameters on whole-head specimen.

resultsThe internal diameter of the cochlea decreases from base to apex, resulting in a significantly different intracochlear positioning of the two tested CI models. While electrodes of the Contour Advance series are located close to the modiolus, thus closer to the spiral ganglion neurons, those of the Straight series are located further away. The artifact portion of the electrode amounts to 50-70% of the radiological diameter of the electrode. An increase in artifact portion from the base (electrode #1 approx. 50%) to the apex (electrode #20 approx. 70%) of the cochlea was observed. The visualization of electrodes in the medial and apical part of the cochlea is limited due to artifact overlapping. There was no correlation between the artifact size and the applied radiation dose.

conclusionThe results indicate that a reduction of the radiation dose by up to 45% of the currently applied radiation dose of standard protocols would be possible. Investigations of the effects on subjective image quality still need to be performed.

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantationCochlear ImplantsArtifactsCochleaCone-Beam Computed TomographyElectrodes, ImplantedHumansTemporal BoneCBCTCochlear implantCTDose reductionElectrode artifactRadiation dose

Identifiers

PMID32671538
PMCPMC8057993
OpenAlexW3043387225

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.