Suitable Electrode Choice for Robotic-Assisted Cochlear Implant Surgery: A Systematic Literature Review of Manual Electrode Insertion Adverse Events.
electrode migration
pre-shaped electrode
robotic assisted cochlear implant surgery
scalar deviation
straight electrode
tip fold-over
Journal
Frontiers in surgery
ISSN: 2296-875X
Titre abrégé: Front Surg
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101645127
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
26
11
2021
accepted:
09
02
2022
entrez:
11
4
2022
pubmed:
12
4
2022
medline:
12
4
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The cochlear implant (CI) electrode insertion process is a key step in CI surgery. One of the aims of advances in robotic-assisted CI surgery (RACIS) is to realize better cochlear structure preservation and to precisely control insertion. The aim of this literature review is to gain insight into electrode selection for RACIS by acquiring a thorough knowledge of electrode insertion and related complications from classic CI surgery involving a manual electrode insertion process. A systematic electronic search of the literature was carried out using PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science to find relevant literature on electrode tip fold over (ETFO), electrode scalar deviation (ESD), and electrode migration (EM) from both pre-shaped and straight electrode types. A total of 82 studies that include 8,603 ears implanted with a CI, i.e., pre-shaped (4,869) and straight electrodes (3,734), were evaluated. The rate of ETFO (25 studies, 2,335 ears), ESD (39 studies, 3,073 ears), and EM (18 studies, 3,195 ears) was determined. An incidence rate (±95% CI) of 5.38% (4.4-6.6%) of ETFO, 28.6% (26.6-30.6%) of ESD, and 0.53% (0.2-1.1%) of EM is associated with pre-shaped electrodes, whereas with straight electrodes it was 0.51% (0.1-1.3%), 11% (9.2-13.0%), and 3.2% (2.5-3.95%), respectively. The differences between the pre-shaped and straight electrode types are highly significant ( Considering the current electrode designs available and the reported incidence of insertion complications, the use of straight electrodes in RACIS and conventional CI surgery (and manual insertion) appears to be less traumatic to intracochlear structures compared with pre-shaped electrodes. However, EM of straight electrodes should be anticipated. RACIS has the potential to reduce these complications.
Sections du résumé
Background and Objective
UNASSIGNED
The cochlear implant (CI) electrode insertion process is a key step in CI surgery. One of the aims of advances in robotic-assisted CI surgery (RACIS) is to realize better cochlear structure preservation and to precisely control insertion. The aim of this literature review is to gain insight into electrode selection for RACIS by acquiring a thorough knowledge of electrode insertion and related complications from classic CI surgery involving a manual electrode insertion process.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
A systematic electronic search of the literature was carried out using PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science to find relevant literature on electrode tip fold over (ETFO), electrode scalar deviation (ESD), and electrode migration (EM) from both pre-shaped and straight electrode types.
Results
UNASSIGNED
A total of 82 studies that include 8,603 ears implanted with a CI, i.e., pre-shaped (4,869) and straight electrodes (3,734), were evaluated. The rate of ETFO (25 studies, 2,335 ears), ESD (39 studies, 3,073 ears), and EM (18 studies, 3,195 ears) was determined. An incidence rate (±95% CI) of 5.38% (4.4-6.6%) of ETFO, 28.6% (26.6-30.6%) of ESD, and 0.53% (0.2-1.1%) of EM is associated with pre-shaped electrodes, whereas with straight electrodes it was 0.51% (0.1-1.3%), 11% (9.2-13.0%), and 3.2% (2.5-3.95%), respectively. The differences between the pre-shaped and straight electrode types are highly significant (
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
Considering the current electrode designs available and the reported incidence of insertion complications, the use of straight electrodes in RACIS and conventional CI surgery (and manual insertion) appears to be less traumatic to intracochlear structures compared with pre-shaped electrodes. However, EM of straight electrodes should be anticipated. RACIS has the potential to reduce these complications.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35402479
doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.823219
pmc: PMC8987358
doi:
Types de publication
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Pagination
823219Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Van de Heyning, Roland, Lassaletta, Agrawal, Atlas, Baumgartner, Brown, Caversaccio, Dazert, Gstoettner, Hagen, Hagr, Jablonski, Kameswaran, Kuzovkov, Leinung, Li, Loth, Magele, Mlynski, Mueller, Parnes, Radeloff, Raine, Rajan, Schmutzhard, Skarzynski, Skarzynski, Sprinzl, Staecker, Stöver, Tavora-Viera, Topsakal, Usami, Van Rompaey, Weiss, Wimmer, Zernotti and Gavilan.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
MK is the chief surgeon and Director of Madras ENT Research Foundation Pvt. LTD., which is the organization he founded and for which he is currently working for. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
Otol Neurotol. 2019 Feb;40(2):177-183
pubmed: 30624399
Otol Neurotol. 2021 Mar 1;42(3):e254-e260
pubmed: 33273309
Otol Neurotol. 2018 Dec;39(10):e1019-e1025
pubmed: 30444847
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2018 Nov;159(5):900-907
pubmed: 30084309
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2020 Jan;277(1):69-76
pubmed: 31637478
Otol Neurotol. 2015 Sep;36(8):1343-8
pubmed: 26176556
Z Med Phys. 2021 Aug;31(3):276-288
pubmed: 32900558
Hear Res. 2022 Feb;414:108425
pubmed: 34979455
Otol Neurotol. 2021 Apr 1;42(4):e438-e444
pubmed: 33306661
HNO. 2009 Jul;57(7):663-70
pubmed: 19554272
Audiol Neurootol. 2015;20(6):349-53
pubmed: 26340539
Otol Neurotol. 2018 Sep;39(8):e654-e659
pubmed: 30113557
Hear Res. 2016 Sep;339:132-41
pubmed: 27371868
J Otolaryngol. 1998 Feb;27(1):26-30
pubmed: 9511116
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2017 Feb;274(2):715-721
pubmed: 27704279
Otol Neurotol. 2021 Feb 1;42(2):e124-e129
pubmed: 32941298
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2020 Feb;277(2):385-392
pubmed: 31677095
Otol Neurotol. 2007 Aug;28(5):658-62
pubmed: 17558341
Front Surg. 2021 Nov 25;8:761217
pubmed: 34901143
Audiol Neurootol. 2013;18(1):17-22
pubmed: 23006502
Acta Otolaryngol. 2008 Sep;128(9):968-75
pubmed: 19086194
Int J Audiol. 2014 Feb;53(2):121-7
pubmed: 24304359
Otol Neurotol. 2019 Jun;40(5):617-624
pubmed: 31083083
Otol Neurotol. 2022 Jan 1;43(1):64-71
pubmed: 34619728
Acta Otolaryngol. 2016 Jun;136(6):564-7
pubmed: 26898701
Ear Hear. 2021 Jul-Aug 01;42(4):949-960
pubmed: 33480623
Otol Neurotol. 2017 Feb;38(2):199-206
pubmed: 27918363
J Audiol Otol. 2021 Oct;25(4):217-223
pubmed: 34551468
Cochlear Implants Int. 2018 Jan;19(1):1-13
pubmed: 29073844
Cochlear Implants Int. 2019 Jul;20(4):207-216
pubmed: 30947632
Otol Neurotol. 2016 Oct;37(9):e341-8
pubmed: 27631657
Otol Neurotol. 2019 Mar;40(3):e304-e310
pubmed: 30741911
Otol Neurotol. 2012 Feb;33(2):169-76
pubmed: 22222576
PLoS One. 2017 Aug 24;12(8):e0183674
pubmed: 28837630
Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2017 Jan;126(1):73-78
pubmed: 27780910
Otol Neurotol. 2018 Jan;39(1):e28-e33
pubmed: 29227449
Audiol Neurootol. 2021;26(5):361-367
pubmed: 33902040
J Laryngol Otol. 2004 Jun;118(6):417-20
pubmed: 15285857
J Int Adv Otol. 2018 Dec;14(3):365-369
pubmed: 30644372
Otol Neurotol. 2019 Jun;40(5):e511-e517
pubmed: 31083086
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2017 Jan;92:27-31
pubmed: 28012529
Eur Radiol. 2022 Feb;32(2):1014-1023
pubmed: 34463797
Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:507241
pubmed: 25140316
Sci Rep. 2021 Oct 29;11(1):21298
pubmed: 34716377
J Int Adv Otol. 2019 Dec;15(3):345-351
pubmed: 31846910
Laryngoscope. 1998 Aug;108(8 Pt 1):1119-23
pubmed: 9707228
Front Neurosci. 2017 May 29;11:291
pubmed: 28611574
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2020 Feb;277(2):367-375
pubmed: 31673779
Ear Hear. 2016 Mar-Apr;37(2):e129-37
pubmed: 26524566
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2016 Jun;273(6):1411-8
pubmed: 26164294
PLoS One. 2019 Aug 2;14(8):e0220543
pubmed: 31374092
IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2021 Dec;68(12):3602-3611
pubmed: 33983877
Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol. 2016 Nov 29;1(6):169-174
pubmed: 28894813
Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis. 2016 Jun;133 Suppl 1:S63-5
pubmed: 27256964
BMJ. 2016 Oct 12;355:i4919
pubmed: 27733354
Front Surg. 2021 Nov 08;8:741401
pubmed: 34820415
Z Med Phys. 2021 Aug;31(3):265-275
pubmed: 32620321
Front Neurosci. 2017 Apr 19;11:216
pubmed: 28469553
Acta Otolaryngol. 2017 Apr;137(4):447-454
pubmed: 28145157
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2020 Jan;277(1):31-35
pubmed: 31552525
Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2020 Dec;86 Suppl 1:38-40
pubmed: 28625811
J Otol. 2019 Sep;14(3):94-100
pubmed: 31467506
Acta Otolaryngol. 2020 Mar;140(3):206-211
pubmed: 31859576
Otol Neurotol. 2020 Jun;41(5):709-714
pubmed: 32080026
Otol Neurotol. 2008 Feb;29(2):156-9
pubmed: 18090097
N Engl J Med. 2020 Apr 16;382(16):1531-1542
pubmed: 32294347
Acta Otolaryngol. 2013 Oct;133(10):1012-21
pubmed: 23768013
Laryngoscope. 2014 Nov;124 Suppl 6:S1-7
pubmed: 24764083
Otol Neurotol. 2020 Jun;41(5):639-643
pubmed: 32150026
Cochlear Implants Int. 2018 Jul;19(4):225-229
pubmed: 29363410
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2020 Feb;277(2):343-350
pubmed: 31650350
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2020 May;162(5):731-736
pubmed: 32180504
Laryngoscope. 2009 Jan;119(1):152-7
pubmed: 19117299
IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2022 Jan;69(1):129-137
pubmed: 34110987
Sci Rep. 2021 Feb 24;11(1):4437
pubmed: 33627724
Clin Otolaryngol. 2021 Nov;46(6):1326-1330
pubmed: 34310841
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2016 Aug;273(8):2009-18
pubmed: 26324880
Otol Neurotol. 2019 Jun;40(5):e503-e510
pubmed: 31083085
Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2009 Sep;4(5):475-86
pubmed: 20033531
Otol Neurotol. 2020 Jan;41(1):33-38
pubmed: 31746820
HNO. 2011 May;59(5):448-52
pubmed: 21505922
Cochlear Implants Int. 2021 Mar;22(2):103-110
pubmed: 33148136
PLoS One. 2018 Oct 26;13(10):e0206435
pubmed: 30365565
Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2012 Apr;78(2):118-23
pubmed: 22499379
Laryngorhinootologie. 1998 Apr;77(4):238-40
pubmed: 9592760
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2015 Feb;36(2):372-7
pubmed: 25430856
Otol Neurotol. 2013 Dec;34(9):1666-9
pubmed: 24136316
Laryngoscope. 2021 Jun;131(6):1358-1368
pubmed: 33159469
Med J Malaysia. 2018 Dec;73(6):393-396
pubmed: 30647210
J Laryngol Otol. 2018 Nov;132(11):1000-1006
pubmed: 30370884
Otol Neurotol. 2016 Dec;37(10):1516-1521
pubmed: 27608418
Otol Neurotol. 2020 Sep;41(8):e993-e1003
pubmed: 32569147
J Acoust Soc Am. 2020 May;147(5):3646
pubmed: 32486813
Front Surg. 2021 Jul 07;8:695728
pubmed: 34307444
J Int Adv Otol. 2020 Apr;16(1):3-7
pubmed: 32209514
Case Rep Otolaryngol. 2021 Jul 30;2021:2918859
pubmed: 34373798
Otol Neurotol. 2016 Sep;37(8):1016-23
pubmed: 27348391
Hear Res. 2017 Dec;356:93-103
pubmed: 29102129
Otol Neurotol. 2015 Mar;36(3):422-9
pubmed: 25575374
Laryngoscope. 2017 Oct;127(10):2352-2357
pubmed: 28304096
Front Surg. 2021 Sep 10;8:729736
pubmed: 34568420
Cochlear Implants Int. 2011 Aug;12(3):129-39
pubmed: 21917200
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2021 Oct;278(10):3707-3714
pubmed: 33090276
Otol Neurotol. 2018 Oct;39(9):1115-1121
pubmed: 30080761
Audiol Neurootol. 2017;22(3):169-179
pubmed: 29059669
Otol Neurotol. 2016 Oct;37(9):e353-9
pubmed: 27631659
Hear Res. 2016 Mar;333:225-234
pubmed: 26341474
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2018 Feb;275(2):385-394
pubmed: 29242990
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2018 Apr;39(4):768-774
pubmed: 29472297
Acta Otolaryngol. 2018 Apr;138(4):375-381
pubmed: 29172857
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2020 May;162(5):718-724
pubmed: 32093543
Audiol Neurootol. 2012;17(5):275-81
pubmed: 22627581
Ideggyogy Sz. 2020 Jan 30;73(1-2):53-59
pubmed: 32057205