Force of Cochlear Implant Electrode Insertion Performed by a Robotic Insertion Tool: Comparison of Traditional Versus Advance Off-Stylet Techniques

Objective: Robotic cochlear implant electrode array insertion offers substantial potential advantages, namely repeatability and minimization of insertion forces, leading to decreased intracochlear trauma. Using such a robotic insertion tool, we sought to analyze force profiles during deployment of stylet-containing electrode arrays using either traditional insertion, in which the stylet is withdrawn after complete insertion of the electrode, or Advance Off-Stylet (AOS) insertion, in which the stylet is withdrawn simultaneous with electrode array insertion. Study Design: Prospective. Setting: Tertiary referral center. Interventions: A robotic cochlear implant insertion tool coupled with a force-sensing carriage was used to perform electrode array insertions into an anatomically correct, three-dimensional scala tympani model during either straight insertion (n = 4) or AOS insertion (n = 4). Main Outcome Measures: Both insertion techniques begin with a 7-mm straight insertion during which forces were similar averaging approximately 0.006 N. For insertion from 7 to 17 mm, traditional insertion forces averaged 0.046 ± 0.027 N, with a peak of 0.093 N, and AOS insertion forces averaged 0.008 ± 0.006 N, with a peak of 0.034 N. Beyond 9.74 mm, the difference between traditional and AOS insertion forces was highly significant. Conclusion: With the use of a robotic insertion tool, which minimizes operator variability and maximizes repeatability, we have shown that cochlear implant electrode insertion via AOS is associated with lower average and maximum insertion forces compared with traditional insertion. These findings support the use of AOS over traditional, straight insertion.

[1]  Bernard Fraysse,et al.  The Size of the Cochlea and Predictions of Insertion Depth Angles for Cochlear Implant Electrodes , 2006, Audiology and Neurotology.

[2]  Bodo Heimann,et al.  An automated insertion tool for cochlear implants: another step towards atraumatic cochlear implant surgery , 2010, International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery.

[3]  Omid Majdani,et al.  Force measurement of insertion of cochlear implant electrode arrays in vitro: comparison of surgeon to automated insertion tool , 2010, Acta oto-laryngologica.

[4]  J. Michael Fitzpatrick,et al.  Customized, rapid-production microstereotactic table for surgical targeting: description of concept and in vitro validation , 2009, International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery.

[5]  Margaret W Skinner,et al.  Role of Electrode Placement as a Contributor to Variability in Cochlear Implant Outcomes , 2008, Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology.

[6]  Thomas S. Rau,et al.  A force sensing Automated Insertion Tool for cochlear electrode implantation , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[7]  Thomas Klenzner,et al.  Quality Control After Insertion of the Nucleus Contour and Contour Advance Electrode in Adults , 2007, Ear and hearing.

[8]  Margaret W Skinner,et al.  In Vivo Estimates of the Position of Advanced Bionics Electrode Arrays in the Human Cochlea , 2007, The Annals of otology, rhinology & laryngology. Supplement.

[9]  T. Ishii,et al.  Mechanical properties of human round window, basilar and Reissner's membranes. , 1995, Acta oto-laryngologica. Supplementum.

[10]  G. Postma,et al.  Hands-on Training Methods for Vocal Fold Injection Education , 2007, The Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology.

[11]  Timo Stöver,et al.  Evaluation of the Advance Off-Stylet Insertion Technique and the Cochlear Insertion Tool in Temporal Bones , 2005, Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology.

[12]  D. Caleb Rucker,et al.  A MANUAL INSERTION MECHANISM FOR PERCUTANEOUS COCHLEAR IMPLANTATION , 2010 .

[13]  Omid Majdani,et al.  Automated insertion of preformed cochlear implant electrodes: evaluation of curling behaviour and insertion forces on an artificial cochlear model , 2010, International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery.

[14]  D. Schurzig,et al.  Design of a Tool Integrating Force Sensing With Automated Insertion in Cochlear Implantation , 2012, IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics.

[15]  Xenia Meshik,et al.  Optimal Cochlear Implant Insertion Vectors , 2010, Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology.

[16]  G. Holmgren Die Entwicklung der Oto-Laryngologie in Schweden während der letzten 40 Jahre: Ein Rückblick , 1941 .

[17]  Fazel Naghdy,et al.  Force Application During Cochlear Implant Insertion: An Analysis for Improvement of Surgeon Technique , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[18]  Bodo Heimann,et al.  Conception and design of an automated insertion tool for cochlear implants , 2008, 2008 30th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[19]  Jian Zhang,et al.  Model and parameter identification of friction during robotic insertion of cochlear-implant electrode arrays , 2009, 2009 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[20]  Omid Majdani,et al.  Clinical Validation Study of Percutaneous Cochlear Access Using Patient-Customized Microstereotactic Frames , 2010, Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology.