Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

Recurrent Cochlear Implant Electrode Exposure in a Smoker With Prior Canal Wall Mastoidectomy: A Case Report.

Cureus·2026

Same author

Cochlear Implants and Electrocautery: A Live Animal Model.

The Laryngoscope·2026

Same author

Preauricular Subtemporal Approach to Middle Fossa Paraganglioma With Infratemporal Extension: 2-Dimensional Operative Video.

Operative neurosurgery (Hagerstown, Md.)·2026

Same author

Impact of anesthetics choice on auditory brainstem response testing in children: A systematic review.

International journal of pediatric otorhinolaryngology·2026

Same author

Alternative Modalities for Temporal Bone Training in Otolaryngology: A Systematic Review.

Journal of otology·2025

Same author

Systematic Review of the Impact of Magnetic Resonance Imaging on Diametric Magnet Cochlear Implants.

Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology·2025

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Apr 18, 2026

Author Spotlight: Advancements in Impedance Monitoring for Cochlear Implant Surgery

Author Spotlight: Advancements in Impedance Monitoring for Cochlear Implant Surgery

Published on: August 4, 2023

Does electrocautery damage cochlear implants?

Anita Jeyakumar¹, Neal M Jackson, Victoria B Givens

¹Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Louisiana State University-Health Science Center, New Orleans, Louisiana, U.S.A.

Otology & Neurotology : Official Publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [And] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology

|January 9, 2015

Summary

This summary is machine-generated.

Monopolar cautery up to 100 W did not damage cochlear implant devices in a cadaveric study. Voltage fluctuations observed were likely due to protective diodes, not device harm.

More Related Videos

Robotic Cochlear Implantation for Direct Cochlear Access

Robotic Cochlear Implantation for Direct Cochlear Access

Published on: June 16, 2022

Author Spotlight: Optimizing EAS with Long Electrodes for Enhanced Cochlear Coverage and Hearing Preservation

Author Spotlight: Optimizing EAS with Long Electrodes for Enhanced Cochlear Coverage and Hearing Preservation

Published on: October 11, 2024

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Apr 18, 2026

Author Spotlight: Advancements in Impedance Monitoring for Cochlear Implant Surgery

Author Spotlight: Advancements in Impedance Monitoring for Cochlear Implant Surgery

Published on: August 4, 2023

Robotic Cochlear Implantation for Direct Cochlear Access

Robotic Cochlear Implantation for Direct Cochlear Access

Published on: June 16, 2022

Author Spotlight: Optimizing EAS with Long Electrodes for Enhanced Cochlear Coverage and Hearing Preservation

Author Spotlight: Optimizing EAS with Long Electrodes for Enhanced Cochlear Coverage and Hearing Preservation

Published on: October 11, 2024

Area of Science:

Otolaryngology
Neurosurgery
Biomedical Engineering

Background:

Electrosurgery is common in head and neck procedures.
Cochlear implants are sensitive electronic devices.
Potential risks of electrosurgery to cochlear implants are not fully understood.

Purpose of the Study:

To evaluate the effects of monopolar cautery on cochlear implant devices.
To determine if voltage fluctuations from cautery adversely affect cochlear implant function.

Main Methods:

A cadaveric model with two Med-El cochlear implants was used.
Monopolar cautery was applied at varying settings (50-100 W) to adjacent muscles.
Device integrity, impedance, and voltage fluctuations were measured.

Main Results:

No changes in impedance or integrity testing were observed across all cautery settings.
Maximum voltage fluctuation recorded was 22 V.
Post-study analysis revealed no device damage.

Conclusions:

Monopolar cautery up to 100 W appears safe for cochlear implant devices.
Observed voltage changes are likely managed by internal protective diodes.
Further research may support revised electrosurgery guidelines for cochlear implant patients.