ArticleLaryngoscope investigative otolaryngology2026
Comparison of Manual Versus Robot-Assisted Piston Prosthesis Placement and Crimping in a 3D-Printed Temporal Bone Model.
Article in Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To reduce operator-dependent variability and improve surgical precision, robot-assisted piston prosthesis placement and crimping during otosclerosis surgery may represent a promising approach. However, dedicated microsurgical forceps for this application are not yet available in clinical practice. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and precision of piston prosthesis placement and crimping, comparing manual and robot-assisted techniques. Methods: A 3D-printed temporal bone model was modified to measure forces applied to the incus. Robot-assisted manipulation was performed using a robotic arm coupled with custom-designed microforceps. Five otologists performed two tasks (piston placement and crimping) under three conditions: (1) manual under visual control, (2) robot-assisted, both applied to placement and crimping, and (3) manual without visual feedback, applied to crimping only. This resulted in five procedures, each repeated three times ( Results: Robot-assisted piston placement resulted in lower maximal torque compared with the manual technique (4.2 ± 3.96 vs. 7.5 ± 4.73 N.mm, Conclusion: Robot-assisted piston prosthesis placement and crimping were feasible and were associated with reduced mechanical loads applied to the incus. Level of Evidence: 5.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.