Robotic Versus Manual Electrode Insertion in Cochlear Implant Surgery: An Experimental Study.

Autor:	Alhabib SF; King Abdullah Ear Specialist Center (KAESC), King Saud Medical City, King Saud University, Riyadh 11411, Saudi Arabia., Alzhrani F; King Abdullah Ear Specialist Center (KAESC), King Saud Medical City, King Saud University, Riyadh 11411, Saudi Arabia., Alsanosi A; King Abdullah Ear Specialist Center (KAESC), King Saud Medical City, King Saud University, Riyadh 11411, Saudi Arabia., Al-Amro M; King Abdullah Ear Specialist Center (KAESC), King Saud Medical City, King Saud University, Riyadh 11411, Saudi Arabia., Alballaa A; King Abdullah Ear Specialist Center (KAESC), King Saud Medical City, King Saud University, Riyadh 11411, Saudi Arabia., Shami I; King Fahad Medical City, Ministry of Health, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia., Hagr A; King Abdullah Ear Specialist Center (KAESC), King Saud Medical City, King Saud University, Riyadh 11411, Saudi Arabia., Alahmadi A; King Abdullah Ear Specialist Center (KAESC), King Saud Medical City, King Saud University, Riyadh 11411, Saudi Arabia., Sharif T; Research Department, MED-EL GmbH, Riyadh 11563, Saudi Arabia., Stichling M; R&D, MED-EL GmbH, Innsbruck, Saudi Arabia., Matulic M; CASCINATION AG, Bern, Switzerland., Assadi MZ; R&D, MED-EL GmbH, Innsbruck, Saudi Arabia., Abdelsamad Y; Research Department, MED-EL GmbH, Riyadh 11563, Saudi Arabia., Almuhawas F; King Abdullah Ear Specialist Center (KAESC), King Saud Medical City, King Saud University, Riyadh 11411, Saudi Arabia.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Clinical and experimental otorhinolaryngology [Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol] 2024 Dec 23. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Dec 23.
DOI:	10.21053/ceo.2024.00253
Abstrakt:	Objectives: This experimental study compares the precision and surgical outcomes of manual versus robotic electrode insertions in cochlear implantation. Methods: Conducted on formalin-fixed cadaveric heads, the study involved nine senior neurotologists performing both manual and robotic insertions. Results: The results showed no statistically significant difference between the two methods in insertion angle, cochlear coverage, or electrode coverage. However, the robotic method demonstrated a significantly slower and more controlled insertion speed (0.1 mm/s) than manual insertion (0.66 ± 0.31 mm/s), crucial for minimizing intra-cochlear force and pressures. While robotic insertions had fewer complications, such as tip fold-over or scala deviation, there were instances of incomplete insertion. Conclusion: The robotic system provided a consistent and controlled insertion process, potentially standardizing cochlear implant surgeries and mitigating outcome variability. The study concludes that robotic-assisted insertion offers significant advantages in controlling insertion speed and consistency, supporting the continued development and clinical evaluation of robotic systems for cochlear implant surgeries.
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu