Detail
Článek
Článek online
FT
Medvik - BMČ
  • Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Comparison of postural control and space perception outcomes between robotic and conventional cochlear implantation in adults

S. Koutná, P. Kalitová, J. Jeřábek, K. Slabý, K. Kučerová, J. Bouček, O. Čakrt

. 2024 ; 281 (7) : 3839-3843. [pub] 20240602

Jazyk angličtina Země Německo

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, srovnávací studie

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc24013344

Grantová podpora
GAUK 323721 Charles University Grant Agancy
grant NU21-08-00280 Cooperatio Program
NU20-08-00311 Cooperatio Program

PURPOSE: The aim of the study is to capture the difference between the groups in direct relation to the type of electrode array insertion during cochlear implantation (CI). The robotic insertion is expected to be a more gently option. As recent studies have shown, there is a difference in perception of visual vertical (SVV) and postural control related to the CI. We assume that there can be differences in postural control and space perception outcomes depending on the type of the surgical method. METHODS: In total, 37 (24 females, mean age ± SD was 42.9 ± 13.0) candidates for CI underwent an assessment. In 14 cases, the insertion of the electrode array was performed by a robotic system (RobOtol, Colin, France) and 23 were performed conventionally. In all of these patients, we performed the same examination before the surgery, the first day, and 3 weeks after the surgery. The protocol consists of static posturography and perception of visual vertical. RESULTS: The both groups, RobOtol and conventional, responded to the procedure similarly despite the dissimilar electrode insertion. There was no difference between two groups in the dynamic of perception SVV and postural parameters. Patients in both groups were statistically significantly affected by the surgical procedure, SVV deviation appeared in the opposite direction from the implanted ear: 0.90° ± 1.25; - 1.67° ± 3.05 and - 0.19° ± 1.78 PRE and POST surgery (p < 0.001). And this deviation was spontaneously adjusted in FOLLOW-UP after 3 weeks (p < 0.01) in the both groups. We did not find a significant difference in postural parameters between the RobOtol and conventional group, even over time. CONCLUSION: Although the robotic system RobOtol allows a substantial reduction in the speed of insertion of the electrode array into the inner ear, our data did not demonstrate a postoperative effect on vestibular functions (SVV and posturography), which have the same character and dynamics as in the group with standard manual insertion. REGISTRATION NUMBER: The project is registered on clinicaltrials.gov (registration number: NCT05547113).

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc24013344
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20240905133959.0
007      
ta
008      
240725s2024 gw f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1007/s00405-024-08664-3 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)38825603
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a gw
100    1_
$a Koutná, Sára $u Department of Rehabilitation and Sport Medicine, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Motol, Prague, Czech Republic. sara.koutna@fnmotol.cz $1 https://orcid.org/0009000875817118
245    10
$a Comparison of postural control and space perception outcomes between robotic and conventional cochlear implantation in adults / $c S. Koutná, P. Kalitová, J. Jeřábek, K. Slabý, K. Kučerová, J. Bouček, O. Čakrt
520    9_
$a PURPOSE: The aim of the study is to capture the difference between the groups in direct relation to the type of electrode array insertion during cochlear implantation (CI). The robotic insertion is expected to be a more gently option. As recent studies have shown, there is a difference in perception of visual vertical (SVV) and postural control related to the CI. We assume that there can be differences in postural control and space perception outcomes depending on the type of the surgical method. METHODS: In total, 37 (24 females, mean age ± SD was 42.9 ± 13.0) candidates for CI underwent an assessment. In 14 cases, the insertion of the electrode array was performed by a robotic system (RobOtol, Colin, France) and 23 were performed conventionally. In all of these patients, we performed the same examination before the surgery, the first day, and 3 weeks after the surgery. The protocol consists of static posturography and perception of visual vertical. RESULTS: The both groups, RobOtol and conventional, responded to the procedure similarly despite the dissimilar electrode insertion. There was no difference between two groups in the dynamic of perception SVV and postural parameters. Patients in both groups were statistically significantly affected by the surgical procedure, SVV deviation appeared in the opposite direction from the implanted ear: 0.90° ± 1.25; - 1.67° ± 3.05 and - 0.19° ± 1.78 PRE and POST surgery (p < 0.001). And this deviation was spontaneously adjusted in FOLLOW-UP after 3 weeks (p < 0.01) in the both groups. We did not find a significant difference in postural parameters between the RobOtol and conventional group, even over time. CONCLUSION: Although the robotic system RobOtol allows a substantial reduction in the speed of insertion of the electrode array into the inner ear, our data did not demonstrate a postoperative effect on vestibular functions (SVV and posturography), which have the same character and dynamics as in the group with standard manual insertion. REGISTRATION NUMBER: The project is registered on clinicaltrials.gov (registration number: NCT05547113).
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
650    12
$a kochleární implantace $x metody $7 D019929
650    _2
$a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
650    _2
$a dospělí $7 D000328
650    12
$a roboticky asistované výkony $x metody $7 D065287
650    _2
$a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
650    12
$a vnímání prostoru $x fyziologie $7 D013028
650    12
$a posturální rovnováha $x fyziologie $7 D004856
650    _2
$a výsledek terapie $7 D016896
650    _2
$a kochleární implantáty $7 D003054
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a srovnávací studie $7 D003160
700    1_
$a Kalitová, Petra $u Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Motol, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Jeřábek, Jaroslav $u Department of Neurology, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Motol, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Slabý, Kryštof $u Department of Rehabilitation and Sport Medicine, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Motol, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Kučerová, Klára $u Department of Rehabilitation and Sport Medicine, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Motol, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Bouček, Jan $u Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Motol, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Čakrt, Ondřej $u Department of Rehabilitation and Sport Medicine, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Motol, Prague, Czech Republic
773    0_
$w MED00009617 $t European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology $x 1434-4726 $g Roč. 281, č. 7 (2024), s. 3839-3843
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38825603 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
990    __
$a 20240725 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20240905133953 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 2143264 $s 1225210
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC-MEDLINE
BMC    __
$a 2024 $b 281 $c 7 $d 3839-3843 $e 20240602 $i 1434-4726 $m European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology $n Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol $x MED00009617
GRA    __
$a GAUK 323721 $p Charles University Grant Agancy
GRA    __
$a grant NU21-08-00280 $p Cooperatio Program
GRA    __
$a NU20-08-00311 $p Cooperatio Program
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20240725

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Nahrávání dat ...

Možnosti archivace

Nahrávání dat ...