4.5 Article

Cochlear implantation in rats: A new surgical approach

Journal

HEARING RESEARCH
Volume 205, Issue 1-2, Pages 115-122

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2005.03.010

Keywords

cochlear histopathology; cochlear implant; electrically evoked auditory brainstem response; stapedial artery

Funding

  1. NIDCD NIH HHS [N01-DC-0-2109, N01-DC-3-1005, N01 DC031005] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The laboratory rat has been used extensively in auditory research but has had limited use in cochlear implant related research due mainly to the surgically restricted access to the scala tympani. We have developed a new surgical method for cochlear implantation in rats. The key to this protocol was cauterizing the stapedial artery (SA) and making a small cochleostomy near the round window in order to enlarge the surgical access to the scala tympani. Five normal hearing Hooded Wistar rats were used to investigate the effect of cauterizing the SA on hearing and auditory nerve survival. Results showed that cauterizing the SA was surgically feasible, afforded excellent exposure of the round window niche for cochleostomy, and did not adversely affect acoustic thresholds measured electrophysiologically. Moreover, there was no difference in spiral ganglion cell densities for any cochlear turn when compared with the contralateral control ears. Three deafened rats were subsequently implanted with a scala tympani electrode array using this new surgical approach. Electrically evoked auditory brainstem responses using bipolar stimulation, and subsequent cochlear histopathology demonstrated that cochlear implantation using a custom-made rat electrode array was safe and effective. The surgical approach presented in this paper presents a safe and effective procedure for acute or chronic cochlear implantation in the rat model. (c) 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available