Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 28, 2026
08:06
Robotic Cochlear Implantation for Direct Cochlear Access
Published on: June 16, 2022
4.5K
Manual Insertion of Cochlear Implant Electrodes Versus Robot-Assisted Insertion and Analysis by Micro-CT: A Temporal
Alexandre Karkas1,2,3, Clément Arnold1, Yann Lelonge1,2,4
1Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, University Medical Center of Saint-Etienne, 42000 Saint-Etienne, France.
Audiology Research
|April 27, 2026
Summary
Robot-assisted and manual cochlear implant electrode insertion showed similar rates of trauma and incomplete placement in human temporal bones. Further research is needed to confirm benefits of robotic insertion in cochlear implantation.
Area of Science:
- Otolaryngology
- Neurosurgery
- Medical Robotics
Background:
- Minimizing trauma during cochlear implantation is crucial.
- Robotic insertion systems are increasingly utilized globally.
- Evaluating robotic systems against manual techniques is essential for optimizing patient outcomes.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare manual versus robot-assisted (RobOtol®) electrode insertion in human temporal bones.
- To assess differences in endocochlear trauma and insertion completeness between the two methods.
Main Methods:
- Sixteen human temporal bones were used, with one implanted manually and the contralateral using RobOtol®.
- Medel-FLEX24 electrodes were inserted via the round window.
- Micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) was employed for descriptive analysis of outcomes.
Main Results:
- Both manual and robotic groups had a 25% rate of insertion trauma.
- Incomplete insertions occurred in 75% of manual cases versus 50% of robotic cases.
- Robotic insertion showed a trend towards more complete insertions.
Conclusions:
- Manual and robot-assisted electrode insertion demonstrated comparable results regarding trauma and completion.
- Larger cadaveric and clinical studies are required to validate the advantages of robot-assisted cochlear implantation.
