ArticleIn vivo (Athens, Greece)
Determination of Cochlear Duct Length With 3D
Article in In vivo (Athens, Greece). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pre- and Postoperative Imaging of Cochlear Implantation in Cadaveric Specimens Using Low-Dose Photon-Counting Detector CT.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2025Article
- Enhancing cochlear duct length estimation by incorporating second-turn parameters.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Photon-Counting Detector CT Virtual Monoengergetic Images for Cochlear Implant Visualization-A Head to Head Comparison to Energy-Integrating Detector CT.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to compare three different methods for measurement of cochlear duct length (CDL) in the clinical setting for two different imaging modalities, namely computed tomography (CT) and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). PATIENTS AND
methodsOne hundred temporal bone data sets (CT: n=50; CBCT: n=50) of non-malformed cochleae were retrospectively analyzed using three different CDL estimation techniques: 3D curved multiplanar reconstruction (cMPR), 2D cMPR and the A-value formula.
resultsThe data sets belonged to 60 patients (34 males, 26 females; mean age=50.28±18.58 years). For both imaging modalities, application of the 3D cMPR estimation technique led to significantly greater mean CDL values than the two-dimensional methods (p<0.0083). The CDL measurements viewed in CT imaging software were significantly shorter than the corresponding CBCT measurements (p<0.05). Using a linear mixed model, differences in CDL by sex (p=0.796), age (p=0.377) and side of ear (p=0.690) were not significant.
conclusionThe 3D cMPR technique was found to provide the most accurate in vivo CDL measurement in non-malformed cochlea in both CT and CBCT imaging compared to 2D methods. The study results also suggest that the higher spatial resolution in CBCT imaging results in more precise CDL determination than in CT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.