European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology· 2026Q1
Comparison of robotic-assisted and manual cochlear implant electrode array insertions considering cochlear geometric factors
- 0citations
- Q1SCImago
- 2026year
Short summary
Robotic-assisted cochlear implant insertion caused significantly less intracochlear trauma (mean score 0.30 vs. 0.89) and zero scalar translocations compared to manual insertion in human temporal bones.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- Robotic insertion had lower trauma scores (0.30 ± 0.48) vs. manual (0.89 ± 0.93).
- No scalar translocations occurred with robotic insertion, versus three in the manual group.
- Manual insertion achieved greater angular insertion depth (428° ± 82°) than robotic (304° ± 47°).
- Smaller cochlear dimensions and lower lateral scala tympani height correlated with increased trauma risk.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
Abstract Purpose Purpose of the present study was to compare the intracochlear trauma coincidentally caused by robotic-assisted and manual cochlear implant electrode array insertions in human temporal bones, and to evaluate the influence of cochlear geometry on insertion outcomes. Materials and methods Twenty human temporal bones, paired according to cochlear size, underwent round window insertion with a HiFocus SlimJ array, either manually or using the iotaSOFT® insertion system. Postoperative cone beam computed tomography (CBCTs) and micro-CTs were used to measure angular insertion depth (AID) and cochlear dimensions, and to assess electrode scalar location to define the level of trauma. Additionally, a cochlea implant imaging tool was used to measure lateral scala tympani height and estimate angular insertion depth. Results No scalar translocation occurred in the robotic group, whereas three translocations were found in the manual group. Mean trauma scores were lower for robotic insertions (0.30 ± 0.48) compared with manual insertions (0.89 ± 0.93). Manual insertion produced significantly deeper AID (428 ± 82°) than robotic insertions (304 ± 47°, p = 0.004). The robotic group exhibited significantly more extra-cochlear contacts (2.3 ± 1.8) than the manual group (0.3 ± 0.7, p = 0.011). Greater AID correlated with more severe trauma (r = 0.682, p = 0.001). Smaller cochlear dimensions were associated with deeper estimated AID and increased trauma. Lower lateral scala tympani height was found for the translocations compared to non-translocations, indicating an influence on trauma risk. Conclusion Robotic-assisted cochlear implantation resulted in less trauma occurrence compared to manual insertion. However, trauma risk was strongly influenced by cochlear geometry and insertion depth. These findings indicate that cochlear geometry is associated with insertion trauma and may support future patient-specific planning and robotic-assisted insertion strategies to reduce trauma.
The authors' abstract, as published at the source. European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, 2026 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: Cognitive Neuroscience
Cognitive NeuroscienceNeuroscience