Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Harnsberger, H. R.
Right arrow Articles by Osborn, A. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Harnsberger, H. R.
Right arrow Articles by Osborn, A. G.

Radiology, Vol 164, 53-57, Copyright © 1987 by Radiological Society of North America


ARTICLES

Cochlear implant candidates: assessment with CT and MR imaging

HR Harnsberger, DJ Dart, JL Parkin, WR Smoker and AG Osborn

Eighty-seven patients with severe to profound hearing loss were evaluated for possible placement of a multichannel cochlear implant hearing device. After initial clinical screening, 42 patients underwent computed tomographic (CT) examination. Five of these patients were also examined with magnetic resonance (MR) imaging. Twenty-two patients received implants. CT of the middle and inner ear was normal in 24 patients (57.1%) and showed labyrinthine ossification in 12 (28.6%), cochlear or fenestral otosclerosis (or both) in four (9.5%), and congenital cochlear malformation in two (4.8%). The information provided by CT was used to (a) exclude patients in whom multichannel cochlear implantation would most likely be unsuccessful (owing to obliterative labyrinthine ossification, or congenital cochlear malformation, severe cochlear, or fenestral otosclerosis), (b) help select the best ear for implantation, and (c) provide a preoperative picture of normal variants and avoidable surgical pitfalls. MR experience is limited but assessment of the size of the cochlear nerve and the membranous labyrinth is possible with this modality and may provide additional information in the evaluation of these patients.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Br. J. Radiol.Home page
C E OFFIAH, R T RAMSDEN, and J E GILLESPIE
Imaging appearances of unusual conditions of the middle and inner ear
Br. J. Radiol., June 1, 2008; 81(966): 504 - 514.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Neuroradiol.Home page
M. A. Mecca, W. Wagle, A. Lupinetti, and S. Parnes
Complication of Cochlear Implantation Surgery
AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., November 1, 2003; 24(10): 2089 - 2091.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1987 by the Radiological Society of North America.