Differences in Cochlear Nerve Cross‐Sectional Area between Normal Hearing and Postlingually Deafened Patients on MRI

Herman, Bjorn; Angeli, Simón I.

doi:10.1177/0194599810390884

Cited by 23 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…normal-hearing adults on 3D-CISS. 9 The normal values for the CN we present here could be used as a reference for examinations of CN diameter on 3D-CISS.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…Several studies have reported the normative diameters of CN or FN on magnetic resonance (MR) imaging. 8,9,11,12 However, to the best of our knowledge, no study has reported normal diameters of both the CN and FN on 3D-CISS at 3 tesla. Therefore, we evaluated the normal diameter values of the CN and FN using 3D-CISS on a 3T MR imaging scanner.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…[1][2][3][4][5][6][7] Some studies have compared cochlear nerve (CN) diameters between normal and hearing-impaired ears on 3-dimensional constructive interference in steady state (3D-CISS). 8,9 This method re‰ects liquid T 2 /T 1 contrast, 10 is useful for examining the anatomy of cerebrospinal or labyrinthine ‰uid space, and is frequently used in clinical settings. The approach used to study the CN could be applied to examine the facial nerve (FN), which is located in the internal auditory canal (IAC) together with the CN.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Establishing Normal Diameter Range of the Cochlear and Facial Nerves with 3D-CISS at 3T

Nakamichi¹,

Yamazaki²,

Ikeda³

et al. 2013

MRMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: We explored normal diameter values of the cochlear (CN) and facial (FN) nerves on 3-dimensional constructive interference in steady state (3D-CISS) using a 3-tesla magnetic resonance (MR) imaging scanner.Methods: A total of 142 patients underwent MR imaging of the inner ear at 3T. We retrospectively analyzed data from 172 ears. All ears had normal hearing and no history of ipsilateral facial palsy. Parasagittal images of 0.5-mm thickness perpendicular to the internal auditory canal were reconstructed from 0.4-mm thick axial 3D-CISS images for all ears. Two independent radiologists measured the long diameter (LD), short diameter (SD), and cross-sectional area (CSA) of each CN and FN. For each measurement, we calculated the mean value from the 2 observers and evaluated interobserver agreement. We also evaluated the correlation between nerve diameter and sex and age.Results: Both observers could perform measurements in 157 CN from 172 ears (91z) and 165 FN from 172 ears (96z). For the CN, the mean LD was 1.35±0.16 mm, the mean SD was 0.99±0.18 mm, and the mean CSA was 1.07±0.30 mm 2 ; for the FN, the mean values were 1.18±0.17 mm (LD), 0.87±0.16 mm (SD), and 0.83±0.27 mm 2 (CSA). Interobserver reliability was good for each measurement (r＝0.569 to 0.691, Pº0.01). The diameters of the 2 nerves tended to be larger in men, but only the CSA of the FN was signiˆcantly larger in men (Pº0.05). Age did not aŠect nerve diameter.Conclusion: We present normal values of CN and FN diameters on 3D-CISS at 3T. Our results warrant further study to clarify the pathophysiological state of the CN or FN using 3D-CISS.

show abstract

“…normal-hearing adults on 3D-CISS. 9 The normal values for the CN we present here could be used as a reference for examinations of CN diameter on 3D-CISS.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Establishing Normal Diameter Range of the Cochlear and Facial Nerves with 3D-CISS at 3T

Nakamichi¹,

Yamazaki²,

Ikeda³

et al. 2013

MRMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, diameters of the cochlear and vestibular nerves were smaller in deaf people as compared to normal-hearing population in the human temporal bone study, and hearing loss was associated with reduction in cochlear nerve size and loss of spiral ganglion cells in mice models [9,10] . Moreover, recent articles have shown that there is a significant reduction in CSA of the cochlear nerve in postlingually deafened compared to normal-hearing adults, as measured on parasagittal CISS MRI, as well as in children with SNHL compared to normal-hearing cohort [3,4] . Clearly, all these results hinge on whether the nerves are symmetrical in "normal" ears, which we have now proven.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Russo et al [3] found that the size of the cochlear nerve is mildly hypoplastic in children with SNHL as compared with normal-hearing children. Similarly, Herman et al [4] demonstrated a significant difference in cochlear nerve cross-sectional area (CSA) between postlingually deaf and normal-hearing adults. However, Sildiroglu et al [5] found no statistically significant difference in cochlear nerve size between sensorineural deaf adults and healthy controls.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 90%

A Comparison of Cochlear Nerve Size in Normal-Hearing Adults Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVE:Cochlear implantation is a clinical and cost-effective treatment for severe hearing loss. Cochlear nerve size assessment by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been investigated for use as a prognostic indicator following cochlear implantation. This study aimed to further that research by assessing nerve size in normal-hearing adults for symmetry. MATERIALS and METHODS:Patients with tinnitus presenting to our center retrospectively had their nerve size assessed by MRI. RESULTS:The study found no significant differences between right and left cochlear nerves in normal-hearing adults, supporting our hypothesis of symmetry in these individuals. This was a previously unproven and uninvestigated hypothesis.CONCLUSION: Nerve size assessment should remain an active area of research in otological disease.

show abstract

Correlation of Cochlear Nerve Size and Auditory Performance After Cochlear Implantation in Postlingually Deaf Patients<alt-title>Cochlear Nerve Size and Auditory Performance</alt-title>

Kim¹

2013

JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Differences in Cochlear Nerve Cross‐Sectional Area between Normal Hearing and Postlingually Deafened Patients on MRI

Cited by 23 publications

References 4 publications

Establishing Normal Diameter Range of the Cochlear and Facial Nerves with 3D-CISS at 3T

Establishing Normal Diameter Range of the Cochlear and Facial Nerves with 3D-CISS at 3T

A Comparison of Cochlear Nerve Size in Normal-Hearing Adults Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Correlation of Cochlear Nerve Size and Auditory Performance After Cochlear Implantation in Postlingually Deaf Patients<alt-title>Cochlear Nerve Size and Auditory Performance</alt-title>

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About