Experiencia inicial con el implante osteointegrado Alpha 1 de Sophono

Escorihuela-García, Vicente; Llópez-Carratalá, Ignacio; Pitarch-Ribas, Ignacia; Latorre-Monteagudo, Emilia; Marco-Algarra, Jaime

doi:10.1016/j.otorri.2014.01.005

Cited by 8 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In clinical trials with other types of transcutaneous implants, average functional gain compared to unaided hearing was 18.4 dB to 42.3 dB (Barbara, Perotti, Gioia, Volpini, & Monini, 2013;Bianchin, Bonali, Russo, & Tribi, 2015;Briggs et al, 2015;Busch, Giere, Lenarz, & Maier, 2015;Centric & Chennupati, 2014;Escorihuela-Garcia, Llopez-Carratala, Pitarch-Ribas, Latorre-Monteagudo, & Marco-Algarra, 2014;Hassepass et al, 2015;Hol, Nelissen, Agterberg, Cremers, & Snik, 2013;Ihler, Volbers, et al, 2014;Iseri et al, 2015;Lustig et al, 2001;Magliulo, Turchetta, Iannella, Valperga di Masino, & de Vincentiis, 2015;Manrique, Sanhueza, Manrique, & de Abajo, 2014;Monini et al, 2015;Rahne et al, 2015;Reinfeldt, Hakansson, Taghavi, Frede´n Jansson, et al, 2015;Riss et al, 2014;Siegert & Kanderske, 2013). So, 28.9 AE 4.2 dB achieved with the implant here fits well within the published range, while systems on an osseointegrated post tend to achieve higher values.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

The Prediction of Speech Recognition in Noise With a Semi-Implantable Bone Conduction Hearing System by External Bone Conduction Stimulation With Headband

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Semi-implantable transcutaneous bone conduction devices are treatment options for conductive and mixed hearing loss (CHL/MHL). For counseling of patients, realistic simulation of the functional result is desirable. This study compared speech recognition in noise with a semi-implantable transcutaneous bone conduction device to external stimulation with a bone conduction device fixed by a headband. Eight German-language adult patients were enrolled after a semi-implantable transcutaneous bone conduction device (Bonebridge, Med-El) was implanted and fitted. Patients received a bone conduction device for external stimulation (Baha BP110, Cochlear) fixed by a headband for comparison. The main outcome measure was speech recognition in noise (Oldenburg Sentence Test). Pure-tone audiometry was performed and subjective benefit was assessed using the Glasgow Benefit Inventory and Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit questionnaires. Unaided, patients showed a mean signal-to-noise ratio threshold of 4.6 ± 4.2 dB S/N for speech recognition. The aided results were −3.3 ± 7.2 dB S/N by external bone conduction stimulation and −1.2 ± 4.0 dB S/N by the semi-implantable bone conduction device. The difference between the two devices was not statistically significant, while the difference was significant between unaided and aided situation for both devices. Both questionnaires for subjective benefit favored the semi-implantable device over external stimulation. We conclude that it is possible to simulate the result of speech recognition in noise with a semi-implantable transcutaneous bone conduction device by external stimulation. This should be part of preoperative counseling of patients with CHL/MHL before implantation of a bone conduction device.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

The Prediction of Speech Recognition in Noise With a Semi-Implantable Bone Conduction Hearing System by External Bone Conduction Stimulation With Headband

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Subjects suffering from unilateral sensorineural hearing loss with normal contralateral hearing will be also included in this study, experiencing improvement by their contralateral ear bone-conducted stimulation. All the patients achieved a better audition that permitted them to better locate sounds, to improve intelligibility and to reduce distortion and feedback as compared to traditional hearing aids (13,14).…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Transcutaneous Osseo-integrated Auditory Devices: Analysis of Two Different Implants in Adults With Different Audiological Inclusion Criteria

Plasencia

Suárez

Barreiro

et al. 2021

Otology &Amp; Neurotology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To determine and compare audiological and speech/language discrimination results in patients with osteointegrated auditory devices, by comparing two different systems including different audiological indications in adult population. Study Design: Descriptive and analytic, cross-sectional, cohort, and retrospective case review. Setting: Tertiary referral center. Materials and Methods: Fifty patients >14 years old, with conductive, mixed, or unilateral sensorineural hearing loss were compared. The variables studied were the following: pure tone audiometry results, air-bone gap, and the percentage of speech/language discrimination using Disyllabic Word Test. The patients were tested preoperative and 12 months after surgical procedure. Subsequently, a comparative analysis of the both systems was carried out. Results: With both implants, pure tone audiometry results and the difference in auditory thresholds and between the air-bone gap improved significantly. Speech discrimination increased significantly after implantation too. A significant difference was observed after implantation of both devices. Patients implanted with one of the implants showed better audiological results, but no significant differences were found with the other device. So, it was shown that the type of device and the type of hearing loss have no influence on the audiological results or complications. Conclusion: Both implants represent a good choice for audiological rehabilitation in patients with transmissive hearing loss, mixed hearing loss, or unilateral sensorineural hearing loss with a high success and low complication rates.

show abstract

Preliminary audiologic and peri-operative outcomes of the Sophono™ transcutaneous bone conduction device: A systematic review

Bezdjian

Bruijnzeel

Daniel

et al. 2017

International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Experiencia inicial con el implante osteointegrado Alpha 1 de Sophono

Cited by 8 publications

References 10 publications

The Prediction of Speech Recognition in Noise With a Semi-Implantable Bone Conduction Hearing System by External Bone Conduction Stimulation With Headband

The Prediction of Speech Recognition in Noise With a Semi-Implantable Bone Conduction Hearing System by External Bone Conduction Stimulation With Headband

Transcutaneous Osseo-integrated Auditory Devices: Analysis of Two Different Implants in Adults With Different Audiological Inclusion Criteria

Preliminary audiologic and peri-operative outcomes of the Sophono™ transcutaneous bone conduction device: A systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About