Measuring the cochlea: comparison between otoplan and curved multiplanar reconstruction and literature review.

IF 0.8 4区医学 Q3 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY

Journal of Laryngology and Otology Pub Date : 2025-08-06 DOI:10.1017/S0022215125102934

Sushovit Sharma Luitel, Manu Malhotra, Madhu Priya, Abhishek Bhardwaj, Sailaja Timmaraju, Pankaj Sharma, Shriya Bhattarai, Shreya Mishra

{"title":"Measuring the cochlea: comparison between otoplan and curved multiplanar reconstruction and literature review.","authors":"Sushovit Sharma Luitel, Manu Malhotra, Madhu Priya, Abhishek Bhardwaj, Sailaja Timmaraju, Pankaj Sharma, Shriya Bhattarai, Shreya Mishra","doi":"10.1017/S0022215125102934","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: To compare two high-resolution computerised tomography based pre-surgical planning software in measuring the cochlear dimensions, which can aid in designing/choosing customised cochlear implant electrodes.Methods: A cross-sectional-observational study was conducted in a tertiary care centre using high-resolution computerised tomography-supported software Otoplan and curved multi-planar reconstruction to find cochlear duct length's maximum and minimum width/diameter and height in 110 ears (55 subjects). Measurements and the time taken by both techniques were compared.Results: There were no significant differences in the measurements taken with the two software; however, the time taken for analysis was significantly higher for curved multi-planar reconstruction than with Otoplan.Conclusion: The steep learning curve, the need for an expert radiologist and the difficulty of use are factors that significantly limit the use of curved multi-planar reconstruction. Otoplan requires less time and can be operated even by someone with less expertise in measuring cochlear dimensions for pre-surgical planning and research.","PeriodicalId":16293,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Laryngology and Otology","volume":" ","pages":"1-6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Laryngology and Otology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022215125102934","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To compare two high-resolution computerised tomography based pre-surgical planning software in measuring the cochlear dimensions, which can aid in designing/choosing customised cochlear implant electrodes.

Methods: A cross-sectional-observational study was conducted in a tertiary care centre using high-resolution computerised tomography-supported software Otoplan and curved multi-planar reconstruction to find cochlear duct length's maximum and minimum width/diameter and height in 110 ears (55 subjects). Measurements and the time taken by both techniques were compared.

Results: There were no significant differences in the measurements taken with the two software; however, the time taken for analysis was significantly higher for curved multi-planar reconstruction than with Otoplan.

Conclusion: The steep learning curve, the need for an expert radiologist and the difficulty of use are factors that significantly limit the use of curved multi-planar reconstruction. Otoplan requires less time and can be operated even by someone with less expertise in measuring cochlear dimensions for pre-surgical planning and research.

查看原文本刊更多论文

耳蜗测量——耳平面与曲面多平面重建的比较及文献综述。

目的：比较两种基于高分辨率计算机断层扫描的术前计划软件在人工耳蜗尺寸测量中的应用，以帮助设计/选择定制的人工耳蜗电极。方法：在某三级保健中心采用高分辨率计算机断层扫描软件Otoplan和弯曲多平面重建方法，对110耳（55例）耳蜗管道长度的最大和最小宽度/直径和高度进行了横断面观察研究。比较了两种技术的测量值和所用时间。结果：两种软件的测量结果无显著差异；然而，曲线多平面重建的分析时间明显高于Otoplan。结论：学习曲线陡、需要放射科专家、使用难度大是限制弯曲多平面重建应用的重要因素。Otoplan需要更少的时间，甚至可以由不太擅长测量耳蜗尺寸以进行术前计划和研究的人操作。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Laryngology and Otology 医学-耳鼻喉科学

CiteScore

3.20

自引率

11.80%

发文量

593

审稿时长

3-6 weeks

期刊介绍： The Journal of Laryngology & Otology (JLO) is a leading, monthly journal containing original scientific articles and clinical records in otology, rhinology, laryngology and related specialties. Founded in 1887, JLO is absorbing reading for ENT specialists and trainees. The journal has an international outlook with contributions from around the world, relevant to all specialists in this area regardless of the country in which they practise. JLO contains main articles (original, review and historical), case reports and short reports as well as radiology, pathology or oncology in focus, a selection of abstracts, book reviews, letters to the editor, general notes and calendar, operative surgery techniques, and occasional supplements. It is fully illustrated and has become a definitive reference source in this fast-moving subject area. Published monthly an annual subscription is excellent value for money. Included in the subscription is access to the JLO interactive web site with searchable abstract database of the journal archive back to 1887.