Ganglion Cell Counts in the Cochleae of Patients with Normal Audiograms

Abstract

Spiral ganglion cells were counted in the right cochleae of 16 patients with normal audiograms and without a history of hearing deficit or other auditory symptoms. Total counts ranged from 29 802 to 38 352, with a mean of 33 623. There was no relationship between total counts and patient age or between total counts and length of either the cochlea or the spiral ganglion.

Technical report: Laser microdissection of cochlear structures from celloidin embedded human temporal bone tissues and detection of the mitochondrial DNA common deletion using real time PCR

“…7). The spiral ganglion cell population in this individual was reduced by 53% in the basal turn and by 28% in the apical turn when compared to the population of spiral ganglion cells observed in a series of normal hearing individuals (Hinojosa et al, 1985) and correlates with the CD levels measured in these tissues.…”

Effects of auditory pathway anatomy and deafness characteristics? (1): On electrically evoked auditory brainstem responses

“…In humans, the auditory nerve from the cochlea to the cochlear nucleus has been shown to be shorter at the apex (Moore, 1987) and the peripheral axons of the human cochlea are 0.3 mm longer in the lower basal region than in the upper basal turn (Spoendlin and Schrott, 1989). Moreover, shorter latencies at the apical part of the array may be explained by the fact that the apex of the electrode array lies at about 1.5 cochlear turns where the number of nerve fibers per mm of cochlea length is higher in animals (Spoendlin, 1972) and humans (Hinojosa et al, 1985;Spoendlin and Schrott, 1990) compared to the base. A relationship between the number of neural fibers and conduction velocity was indeed shown in the auditory pathway by Rattay (1987), as well as in the visual pathway (Cavalcanti do Egito Vasconcelos et al, 2003) and the motor pathway (Morgan and Proske, 2001).…”

Sex differences in the length of the organ of Corti in humans

“…Note that the lengths from Hardy 21 were converted by adding 1 mm and then multiplying by 1.039. Lengths from Walby, 22 Hinojosa et al, 23 and Pollak et al 24 were multiplied by 1.039. As described in the discussion of the serial section methods above, these conversions make the measurements using the Guild and Guild/Schuknecht methods comparable to those made by the surface methods.…”