Skin flap thickness in cochlear implant patients — a prospective study

Abstract The thickness and quality of the skin overlying a cochlear implant is important for its integrity. It should be thick enough to protect the implant and prevent flap breakdown yet should not be so thick that it impedes the electronic signal or causes difficulty wearing the coil because of loss of the magnetic coupling. The principle of this study was to devise a method to assess the thickness of skin over a cochlear implant receiver stimulator package and prospectively measure this thickness during the first year following surgery. All patients studied were implanted with MED-EL COMBI 40+ implants. The first cohort consisted of 35 adults; the second 23 children. Various methods of measurement were assessed. In this study the principle of the Hall Effect electrode was used to measure the magnetic flux density of the magnet within the receiver stimulator package. Following standardization, results showed that skin thickness significantly thinned in the adult group before stabilizing. This was less obvious in children, probably due to the effect of the skin thickening as the child grows. Knowledge of skin thickness has implications relating to the functioning of an implant and avoiding potential flap related complications. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  A Rebora,et al.  The thickness of human scalp: normal and bald. , 1972, The Journal of investigative dermatology.

[2]  N. Cohen,et al.  Medical or surgical complications related to the Nucleus multichannel cochlear implant. , 1988, The Annals of otology, rhinology & laryngology. Supplement.

[3]  M. Kenna Epidemiology and Natural History of Chronic Suppurative Otitis Media , 1988 .

[4]  Seymour R. Cohen,et al.  Congenital Stenosis of the Lower Esophagus Associated with Leiomyoma and Leiomyosarcoma of the Gastrointestinal Tract , 1988, The Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology.

[5]  P. Chute,et al.  Cochlear Implant Flap Complications , 1990, The Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology.

[6]  N. Cohen,et al.  Surgical complications of multichannel cochlear implants in North America. , 1993, Advances in Oto-Rhino-Laryngology.

[7]  Arlene A. Forastiere,et al.  Head and Neck , 1998, Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging.

[8]  A. J. Lupin,et al.  Scalp thickness in the temporal region: its relevance to the development of cochlear implants , 2001, Cochlear implants international.

[9]  T. Nikolopoulos,et al.  Minimal Access Surgery for Pediatric Cochlear Implantation , 2002, Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology.

[10]  A. Q. Summerfield,et al.  Cochlear implantation--United Kingdom and Ireland surgical survey. , 2003, Cochlear implants international.

[11]  K. Green,et al.  Complications following adult cochlear implantation: experience in Manchester. , 2004, The Journal of laryngology and otology.

[12]  C. Richter Cochlear Implants: Fundamentals and Applications , 2004 .