Bonebridge Implantation for Conductive Hearing Loss in a Patient with Oval Window Atresia

Kim, Minbum

doi:10.5152/iao.2015.1341

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 12 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%

“…Safety of the device was assessed by collecting information on complications during surgery and adverse events in the postoperative period (S4 and S5 Tables). Twenty-five [16, 26, 27, 6, 7, 29, 24, 30, 8–10, 31, 11, 25, 17, 33, 18, 13, 35, 36, 14, 38, 15, 21, 46] publications out of the 39 identified citations reported on complications and adverse events, out of which ten citations (n = 259; 90.6%), explicitly stated that no complications occurred during the full study period [16, 27, 30, 10, 31, 11, 25, 38, 15, 21]. A total of 286 ears were evaluated for safety outcomes over a mean follow-up period of 11.7±4.5 months (range: 3–36 months).…”

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

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%

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

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In 2015, Kim described a case of bilateral oval window atresia but without atresia of the external auditory canal or microtia in an 8-year-old girl who received a Bonebridge bone conduction implant (BCI) system, which resulted significantly improved hearing [ 26 ]. This previous report confirms the long-term outcomes in cases with congenital ossicular anomalies, where the auditory ossicle system is not functioning, treated with Bonebridge BCI [ 26 ]. The safety and efficacy of the Bonebridge BCI system were initially addressed in a European multicenter study [ 2 , 28 ], and subsequently also demonstrated in children [ 29 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Bone Conduction Implantable Device as a Functional Treatment Option in Unilateral Microtia with Bilateral Stapes Ankylosis: A Report of Two Cases

Zanetti

Berardino

2018

Am J Case Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Case seriesPatient: Female, 29 • Male, 35Final Diagnosis: Microtia with stapedial ankylosisSymptoms: Hearing lossMedication: —Clinical Procedure: Bone conduction implantable deviceSpecialty: AudiologyObjective:Congenital defects/diseasesBackground:Implantable devices have been proposed as an alternative to hearing aids and auditory canal reconstruction in patients with microtia (congenital aural atresia), which includes a malformation of the external and middle ear. This report is of two rare cases of microtia associated with congenital stapes ankylosis treated with an implantable device and describes the treatment outcomes.Case Report:Two siblings from Ecuador, a 29-year-old woman, and her 35-year-old brother, were born with unilateral type II microtia with bilateral external auditory canal atresia and conductive hearing loss. Pre-operatively, high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) imaging was performed using FastView software to allow placement of a bone conduction-floating mass transducer (BC-FMT) to couple a Bonebridge bone conduction implant (BCI) system in both patients. Pure-tone audiometry (PTA) testing and speech audiology were performed. The Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) and the Speech, Spatial and Qualities (SSQ) of hearing scale questionnaires and scoring systems were used. Following activation of the implantable device, both patients achieved improved bilateral conductive hearing with sound-field (field-free) thresholds >25 dB, and speech recognition scores >90%. In both cases, hearing improvement remained at three years following surgery.Conclusions:To our knowledge, these are the first reported cases of microtia with congenital stapes ankylosis successfully treated with a bone conduction implantable device. Patients with microtia and stapes ankylosis who are reluctant to undergo surgery may benefit from unilateral or bilateral, short-term or long-term use of a Bonebridge bone conduction implantable device.

show abstract

“…Noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) is one of the most common chronic hearing problems, which affects approximately 29 million Americans (9,10). The pathophysiology of NIHL includes a combination of mechanical and metabolic factors.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Occupational Noise Exposure and Hearing Impairment among Spinning Workers in Iran

Saberi

Ghasemi

2017

Iran Red Crescent Med J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Hearing impairment (HI), resulting from noise exposure, can be incapacitating and irreversible. Objectives: The present study aimed to determine the relationship between noise exposure and HI among workers and employees in a spinning industry. Methods: This cross sectional study was conducted on 489 workers in a spinning industry in Iran during 2015. The census method was applied for the purpose of sampling. The hearing threshold of each ear was determined during work shifts, using Madsen audiometric device. HI was calculated, based on the guidelines by the American Medical Association (AMA). The effects of different variables on HI were assessed via regression analysis.

show abstract

Bonebridge Implantation for Conductive Hearing Loss in a Patient with Oval Window Atresia

Cited by 7 publications

References 12 publications

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

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

A Bone Conduction Implantable Device as a Functional Treatment Option in Unilateral Microtia with Bilateral Stapes Ankylosis: A Report of Two Cases

Occupational Noise Exposure and Hearing Impairment among Spinning Workers in Iran

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About