INTRODUCTION: In order to achieve a minimal trauma to the inner ear structures during array insertion, it would be suitable to control insertion forces. The aim of this work was to compare the insertion forces of an array insertion into anatomical specimens with three different insertion techniques: with forceps, with a commercial tool, and with a motorized tool. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Temporal bones have been mounted on a 6-axis force sensor to record insertion forces. Each temporal bone has been inserted, with a lateral wall electrode array, in random order, with each of the 3 techniques. RESULTS: Forceps manual and commercial tool insertions generated multiple jerks during whole length insertion related to fits and starts. On the contrary, insertion force with the motorized tool only rose at the end of the insertion. Overall force momentum was 1.16 ± 0.505 N (mean ± SD, n = 10), 1.337 ± 0.408 N (n = 8), and 1.573 ± 0.764 N (n = 8) for manual insertion with forceps and commercial and motorized tools, respectively. CONCLUSION: Considering force momentum, no difference between the three techniques was observed. Nevertheless, a more predictable force profile could be observed with the motorized tool with a smoother rise of insertion forces.

Definition of metrics to evaluate cochlear array insertion forces performed with forceps, insertion tool, or motorized tool in temporal bone specimens / Nguyen, Y; Kazmitcheff, G; De Seta, D; Miroir, M; Ferrary, E; Sterkers, O.. - In: BIOMED RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL. - ISSN 2314-6141. - ELETTRONICO. - (2014). [10.1155/2014/532570]

Definition of metrics to evaluate cochlear array insertion forces performed with forceps, insertion tool, or motorized tool in temporal bone specimens

De Seta D
Methodology
;
2014

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: In order to achieve a minimal trauma to the inner ear structures during array insertion, it would be suitable to control insertion forces. The aim of this work was to compare the insertion forces of an array insertion into anatomical specimens with three different insertion techniques: with forceps, with a commercial tool, and with a motorized tool. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Temporal bones have been mounted on a 6-axis force sensor to record insertion forces. Each temporal bone has been inserted, with a lateral wall electrode array, in random order, with each of the 3 techniques. RESULTS: Forceps manual and commercial tool insertions generated multiple jerks during whole length insertion related to fits and starts. On the contrary, insertion force with the motorized tool only rose at the end of the insertion. Overall force momentum was 1.16 ± 0.505 N (mean ± SD, n = 10), 1.337 ± 0.408 N (n = 8), and 1.573 ± 0.764 N (n = 8) for manual insertion with forceps and commercial and motorized tools, respectively. CONCLUSION: Considering force momentum, no difference between the three techniques was observed. Nevertheless, a more predictable force profile could be observed with the motorized tool with a smoother rise of insertion forces.
2014
insertion forces; metrics; cochlear implants; temporal bone
01 Pubblicazione su rivista::01a Articolo in rivista
Definition of metrics to evaluate cochlear array insertion forces performed with forceps, insertion tool, or motorized tool in temporal bone specimens / Nguyen, Y; Kazmitcheff, G; De Seta, D; Miroir, M; Ferrary, E; Sterkers, O.. - In: BIOMED RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL. - ISSN 2314-6141. - ELETTRONICO. - (2014). [10.1155/2014/532570]
File allegati a questo prodotto
File Dimensione Formato  
Nguyen_Definition_2014.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 2 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
2 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri PDF

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11573/677455
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 5
  • Scopus 23
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 17
social impact