Cochlear implant phantom for evaluating computed tomography acquisition parameters

Abstract. Cochlear implants (CIs) are surgically implantable neuroprosthetic devices used to treat profound hearing loss. Recent literature indicates that there is a correlation between the final intracochlear positioning of the CI electrode arrays and the ultimate hearing outcome of the patient, indicating that further studies to better understand the relationship between electrode position and outcomes could have significant implications for future surgical techniques, array design, and processor programming methods. Postimplantation high-resolution computed tomography (CT) imaging is the best modality for localizing electrodes and provides the resolution necessary to visually identify electrode position, although with an unknown degree of accuracy depending on image acquisition parameters, like the hounsfield unit (HU) range of reconstruction, orientation, radiation dose, and image resolution. We report on the development of a phantom and on its use to study how four acquisition parameters, including image resolution and HU range of reconstruction, affect how accurately the true position of the electrodes can be found in a dataset of CT scans acquired from multiple helical and cone beam scanners. We also show how the phantom can be used to evaluate the effect of acquisition parameters on automatic electrode localization techniques.

[1]  Omid Majdani,et al.  Automatic Segmentation of Intracochlear Anatomy in Conventional CT , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[2]  Benoit M. Dawant,et al.  Image-Guidance Enables New Methods for Customizing Cochlear Implant Stimulation Strategies , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[3]  Ge Wang,et al.  Blind deblurring of spiral CT images , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[4]  Blake S. Wilson,et al.  Speech Perception and Sound Localization by Adults with Bilateral Cochlear Implants , 2011 .

[5]  Maik C. Stüttgen,et al.  Computation of measures of effect size for neuroscience data sets , 2011, The European journal of neuroscience.

[6]  Jacob Cohen Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[7]  Benoit M Dawant,et al.  Impact of electrode design and surgical approach on scalar location and cochlear implant outcomes , 2014, The Laryngoscope.

[8]  G. Wang,et al.  In vivo measures of cochlear length and insertion depth of nucleus cochlear implant electrode arrays. , 1998, The Annals of otology, rhinology & laryngology. Supplement.

[9]  Grace Wahba,et al.  Problem 65-1: A least squares estimate of satellite attitude , 1966 .

[10]  Jay B. West,et al.  Predicting error in rigid-body point-based registration , 1998, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[11]  Benoit M. Dawant,et al.  Automatic Localization of Cochlear Implant Electrodes in CT , 2014, MICCAI.

[12]  René H. Gifford,et al.  Availability of Binaural Cues for Bilateral Implant Recipients and Bimodal Listeners with and without Preserved Hearing in the Implanted Ear , 2013, Audiology and Neurotology.

[13]  Thomas Klenzner,et al.  Quality Control after Cochlear Implant Surgery by Means of Rotational Tomography , 2005, Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology.

[14]  Guy Marchal,et al.  Multimodality image registration by maximization of mutual information , 1997, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[15]  Ge Wang,et al.  Digital X-ray stereophotogrammetry for cochlear implantation , 2000, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[16]  G. Wahba A Least Squares Estimate of Satellite Attitude , 1965 .

[17]  Hengyong Yu,et al.  Design, analysis and simulation for development of the first clinical micro-CT scanner. , 2005, Academic radiology.

[18]  Antje Aschendorff,et al.  Nondestructive Three-dimensional Analysis of Electrode to Modiolus Proximity , 2002, Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology.

[19]  Benoit M. Dawant,et al.  Automatic Graph-Based Localization of Cochlear Implant Electrodes in CT , 2015, MICCAI.

[20]  Margaret W Skinner,et al.  Role of Electrode Placement as a Contributor to Variability in Cochlear Implant Outcomes , 2008, Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology.

[21]  Johan H M Frijns,et al.  Multisection CT as a valuable tool in the postoperative assessment of cochlear implant patients. , 2005, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[22]  Ge Wang,et al.  Spiral CT image deblurring for cochlear implantation , 1998, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[23]  Welch Bl THE GENERALIZATION OF ‘STUDENT'S’ PROBLEM WHEN SEVERAL DIFFERENT POPULATION VARLANCES ARE INVOLVED , 1947 .

[24]  Karen M Mispagel,et al.  Factors Affecting Open-Set Word Recognition in Adults With Cochlear Implants , 2013, Ear and hearing.

[25]  Kumiko Yukawa,et al.  Effects of Insertion Depth of Cochlear Implant Electrodes upon Speech Perception , 2004, Audiology and Neurotology.

[26]  Margaret W. Skinner,et al.  In Vivo Estimates of the Position of Advanced Bionics Electrode Arrays in the Human Cochlea , 2007 .

[27]  Benoit M Dawant,et al.  Assessment of Electrode Placement and Audiological Outcomes in Bilateral Cochlear Implantation , 2011, Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology.