| Home | E-Submission | Sitemap | Contact Us |  
Clinical and Experimental Otorhinolaryngology > Accepted Articles
doi: https://doi.org/10.21053/ceo.2024.00253    [Accepted]
Robotic Versus Manual Electrode Insertion in Cochlear Implant Surgery: An Experimental Study
Salman F Alhabib1 , Farid Alzhrani1 , Abdulrahman Alsanosi1 , Mariam Al-Amro1 , Abdulaziz Alballaa1 , Ibrahim Shami2 , Abdulrahman Hagr1 , Asma Alahmadi1 , Tahir Sharif3 , Maximilian Stichling4 , Marco Matulic5 , Masoud Zoka Assadi4 , Yassin Abdelsamad3 , Fida Almuhawas1
1King Abdullah Ear Specialist Center (KAESC), King Saud Medical City, King Saud University, Riyadh 11411, Saudi Arabia
2King Fahad Medical City, Ministry of Health, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
3Research Department, MED-EL GmbH, Riyadh 11563, Saudi Arabia
4R&D, MED-EL GmbH, Innsbruck, Saudi Arabia
5CASCINATION AG, Bern, Switzerland
Correspondence  Salman F Alhabib ,Email: sfalhabib@hotmail.com
Received: August 23, 2024; Revised: December 8, 2024   Accepted: December 21, 2024.  Published online: December 23, 2024.
ABSTRACT
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.
Keywords: cochlear implantation, robotic insertion, manual insertion, cochlear coverage, electrode coverage
TOOLS
Download PDF File  Download PDF File
Full text via DOI  Full text via DOI
Download Citation  Download Citation
Share:      
METRICS
0
Crossref
0
Scopus
334
View
62
Download
Related article
Electrode Array Extrusion in Cochlear Implantation: Our Experience  2022 August;15(3)
Editorial Office
Korean Society of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery
103-307 Park Tower officetel, Yongsan-dong 5-ga, Yongsan-gu, Seoul 04385, Korea
TEL: +82-2-711-9091   FAX: +82-2-3487-6603   E-mail: editor.eceo@gmail.com
Copyright © Korean Society of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.                 Developed in M2PI
Close layer
prev next