» Articles » PMID: 37892718

Robot-Assisted and Manual Cochlear Implantation: An Intra-Individual Study of Speech Recognition

Overview
Journal J Clin Med
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2023 Oct 28
PMID 37892718
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Cochlear implantation (CI) allows rehabilitation for patients with severe to profound hearing impairment. Although the use of a robotic assistant provides technical assistance to the surgeon, the assessment of the impact of its use on auditory outcomes remains uncertain. We aim to compare the hearing results of patients who underwent bilateral cochlear implantation; one side was performed with manual insertion and the other side with robot-assisted insertion. The electrode array intrascalar positioning and the surgery duration were also studied. This retrospective intra-individual study involved 10 patients who underwent bilateral cochlear implantation. The study included two infants and eight adults. The unique composition of this cohort enabled us to utilize each patient as their own control. Regarding speech disyllabic recognition, pure tone average, ECAP, ratio of array translocation, basilar membrane rupture, and percentage of translocated electrodes, there was no difference between manual and robot-assisted CI groups. This study is the first to compare intra-individual hearing performance after cochlear implantation, either manually or robot-assisted. The number of patients and the time delay between manual and robotic implantation may have led to a lack of power, but there was no apparent difference in hearing performance between manual and robotic implantation.

Citing Articles

Robotic assistance during cochlear implantation: the rationale for consistent, controlled speed of electrode array insertion.

Kashani R, Henslee A, Nelson R, Hansen M Front Neurol. 2024; 15:1335994.

PMID: 38318440 PMC: 10839068. DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2024.1335994.

References
1.
Rebscher S, Hetherington A, Bonham B, Wardrop P, Whinney D, Leake P . Considerations for design of future cochlear implant electrode arrays: electrode array stiffness, size, and depth of insertion. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2008; 45(5):731-47. PMC: 2562296. DOI: 10.1682/jrrd.2007.08.0119. View

2.
Veleur M, Lahlou G, Torres R, Daoudi H, Mosnier I, Ferrary E . Robot-Assisted Middle Ear Endoscopic Surgery: Preliminary Results on 37 Patients. Front Surg. 2021; 8:740935. PMC: 8527038. DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2021.740935. View

3.
Barriat S, Peigneux N, Duran U, Camby S, Lefebvre P . The Use of a Robot to Insert an Electrode Array of Cochlear Implants in the Cochlea: A Feasibility Study and Preliminary Results. Audiol Neurootol. 2021; 26(5):361-367. DOI: 10.1159/000513509. View

4.
Breinbauer H, Praetorius M . Variability of an ideal insertion vector for cochlear implantation. Otol Neurotol. 2015; 36(4):610-7. DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000000719. View

5.
Lo Russo F, Conte G, Di Berardino F, Cavicchiolo S, Casale S, Caschera L . Impact of Cochlear Implant Array Placement on Speech Perception. Clin Neuroradiol. 2021; 32(1):175-183. DOI: 10.1007/s00062-021-01046-w. View