Aesthetic and hearing rehabilitation in patients with bilateral microtia-atresia

Fan, Xinmiao; Wang, Yibei; Wang, Pu; Fan, Yue; Chen, Yu; Zhu, Yuanli; Chen, Xiaowei

doi:10.1016/j.ijporl.2017.08.008

Cited by 25 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The preoperative and postoperative results can be seen in the S2 Table. Speech understanding in quiet was assessed in 27 publications [16, 26, 27, 7, 28, 22, 29, 24, 30, 10, 31, 25, 32–34, 18, 12, 13, 35, 36, 20, 14, 37, 38, 21, 39], resulting in a mean unaided WRS score of 25.73±23.64% improving to 84.48±15.09% in the aided condition, resulting in an overall mean improvement of almost 60% (S2 Table).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The meta-analysis outcomes for reported mean word recognition scores including SD at 65 dB SPL in the CHL group resulted in an improvement of 56.73% [95%CI 45.52, 67.94](test for heterogeneity: Q = 32.64, df = 3, p<0.001, I2 = 90.4%)(n = 57)(F/U range: 2–5 months) (Fig 4) [26, 6, 28, 39]. Outcomes were similar in the C/MHL group, reported in 3 studies comprising 31 subjects (mean WRS improvement 55.14%)[21.67, 88.68](test for heterogeneity: Q = 23.38, df = 2, p<0.001, I2 = 92.1%)(F/U ranged between 1 and 3 months)[24, 13, 35].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Sixteen publications with 215 subjects reported on subjective outcomes after atBC implantation (S3 Table) [27, 7, 28, 22–24, 8–10, 44, 17, 12, 13, 35, 38, 21].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Active transcutaneous bone conduction hearing implants: Systematic review and meta-analysis

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundIn July 2018 the active transcutaneous bone conduction hearing implant received FDA approval in the US (for patients 12 years and older with conductive and/or mixed hearing loss or single-sided deafness), reflecting the current trend of moving away from percutaneous hearing solutions towards intact skin systems.ObjectivesTo critically assess the current literature on safety, efficacy and subjective benefit after implantation with an active transcutaneous bone conduction hearing device.Data sourcesLiterature investigation was performed by electronic database search including PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and manual search of relevant journals and reference lists of included studies.Study eligibility criteriaRandomized controlled trials, clinical controlled trials and cohort studies, case series and case reports investigating subjective and objective outcomes.Study appraisal and synthesis methodsRetrieved literature was screened and extracted by two reviewers independently. Subgroup analysis of indications (conductive and/or mixed hearing loss, single-sided deafness) and participant ages (pediatric vs. adults) was conducted on patients with active transcutaneous bone conduction devices. Sensitivity analysis was performed to test the stability of the results in meta-analysis.Results39 citations reporting on pre- and postoperative audiological results, speech performance in quiet and in noise, localization testing as well as subjective outcomes were included in this systematic review. Functional gain as well as word recognition score outcomes could be further investigated via meta-analysis. All outcomes reported and summarized here reflect beneficial audiological performance and high patient satisfaction, accompanied with a low complications rate (minor event incidence rate: 9.9 person-years; major incidence rate: 148.9 person-years) for the indications of conductive and mixed hearing loss as well as in individuals suffering from single-sided deafness for all age groups of subjects who underwent active transcutaneous bone conduction hearing device implantation.LimitationsA limiting factor of this systematic review was the Level of Evidence of the reviewed literature, comprising 2a/3a studies (cohort studies and case-control studies). Furthermore, the reporting standards, especially in outcomes such as word recognition scores in quiet and in noise, vary across study cites from various countries, which impedes comparisons. Last but not least, no other comparable other device was retrieved as the active transcutaneous bone conduction hearing device is the only available at the moment.ConclusionThe device’s transcutaneous technology results in a minor event incidence rate of one in 9.9 person-years and a major incidence rate of one in 148.9 person-years. Based on the audiological outcomes, high patient satisfaction as well as the low complication rate, the authors recommend the active transcutaneous bone conduction hearing device as a safe and effective treatment for patients sufferi...

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Active transcutaneous bone conduction hearing implants: Systematic review and meta-analysis

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Implantation of this device requires a greater mastoid space to fix the implant without damaging the dura or sigmoid sinus. This system has been reported to result in lower complication rates than percutaneous bone conduction implants and shows proven auditory benefits, because percutaneous BCHIs, such as BAHA and Ponto, need lasting careful postoperative nursing (10,11,25). For patients who have enough mastoid space, cannot ensure postoperative nursing or wish a good appearance, the Bonebridge may be an optimal option.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…AV was greater when wearing BCHIs, because although unaided patients may not have recognized loud sounds as annoying, those using devices heard sounds they had not heard for a long period of time, which may be helpful in hearing restoration. Thus, an increase in AV may be a positive sign of hearing recovery (12,25). The APHAB questionnaire includes quite complicated questions and does not seem to be well understood by young patients, even with their parents’ help.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%