Pan J X, Jia H, Tan H Y, Zhou X, Wu H
Department of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200011, China Ear Institute, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200125, China Shanghai Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine on Ear and Nose Diseases, Shanghai 200125, China.
Zhonghua Er Bi Yan Hou Tou Jing Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2021 Jul 7;56(7):691-697. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn115330-20200831-00712.
To investigate the effect of insertion technique and electrode array type on the insertion force of electrode array, and to provide a basis for further optimizing electrode design and facilitating mini-invasive electrode insertion. Three types of electrode array from Nurotron (Standard Electrode, Slim-medium Electrode, Slim-long Electrode) were studied. from July 2019 to December 2019. These electrode arrays were inserted into the phantom models of the cochlea, manually or robot-assisted(medium speed and low speed). The real-time force during electrode array insertion was recorded by ATI Nano 17 Ti sensors and was analyzed by accessory software. Origin 2020b software was used for statistical processing. The insertion force of all electrode arrays progressively increased with the insertion depth. With the manual technique, the peak force of slim-medium electrode insertion was significantly smaller than that of the standard electrode insertion((71.0±16.6) mN vs (140.9±52.7) mN, =3.683, <0.01), and the peak force of the slim-long electrode insertion was between the peak force of standard electrode and slim-medium electrode(>0.05). No difference was found in the force variation of insertion among the three electrodes(>0.05). With medium-speed and low-speed robotic assistance, the peak force characteristics of three electrodes were similar to those with the manual technique, but the force variation of standard electrode insertion ((83.9±9.7) mN/s) at medium speed was significantly larger than that of the slim-long electrode insertion ((69.2±4.0)mN/s), and the force variation of the standard electrode insertion at low speed was significantly greater than the other two electrodes. For the same electrode, robot-assisted insertion presented significantly lower peak force and force variation than manual insertion for each type of electrode array. But there was no difference in the peak force and force variation between two-speed levels of robot assistance (>0.05). The insertion force of the electrode array will be lower when a slim electrode array or robot technique is applied. Long electrode array might make manual insertion difficult or less precise. Robot assistance has advantage on force control during electrode array insertion.
研究插入技术和电极阵列类型对电极阵列插入力的影响,为进一步优化电极设计和促进微创电极插入提供依据。对来自诺尔通的三种类型的电极阵列(标准电极、细中电极、细长电极)进行了研究。研究时间为2019年7月至2019年12月。这些电极阵列通过手动或机器人辅助(中速和低速)插入耳蜗的模型中。电极阵列插入过程中的实时力由ATI Nano 17 Ti传感器记录,并通过配套软件进行分析。使用Origin 2020b软件进行统计处理。所有电极阵列的插入力均随插入深度逐渐增加。采用手动技术时,细中电极插入的峰值力显著小于标准电极插入的峰值力((71.0±16.6)mN对(140.9±52.7)mN,t = 3.683,P < 0.01),细长电极插入的峰值力介于标准电极和细中电极的峰值力之间(P > 0.05)。三种电极插入力的变化无差异(P > 0.05)。在中速和低速机器人辅助下,三种电极的峰值力特征与手动技术相似,但标准电极在中速插入时的力变化((83.9±9.7)mN/s)显著大于细长电极插入时的力变化((69.2±4.0)mN/s),标准电极在低速插入时的力变化显著大于其他两种电极。对于同一电极,机器人辅助插入的峰值力和力变化均显著低于每种电极阵列的手动插入。但机器人辅助的两个速度水平之间的峰值力和力变化无差异(P > 0.05)。应用细电极阵列或机器人技术时,电极阵列的插入力会更低。长电极阵列可能会使手动插入困难或不太精确。机器人辅助在电极阵列插入过程中的力控制方面具有优势。