Hearing Rehabilitation Using the BAHA Bone-Anchored Hearing Aid: Results in 40 Patients

Lustig, Lawrence R.; Arts, H. Alexander; Brackmann, Derald E.; Francis, Howard; Molony, Tim; Megerian, Cliff A.; Moore, Gary F.; Moore, Karen; Morrow, Trish; Potsic, William P.; Rubenstein, Jay T.; Srireddy, Sharmilla; Syms, Charles A.; Takahashi, Gail A.; Vernick, David M.; Wackym, Phillip A.; Niparko, John K.

doi:10.1097/00129492-200105000-00010

Cited by 120 publications

(93 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, this case involved very severe malformation, and the oval window was smaller than usual; therefore, we cannot describe this as a typical outcome [24,25] . The patients have been followed for the last two years, and they have reported no complications related to the surgery or their hearing stability.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

An Implantable Hearing System As Rehabilitation for Hearing Loss Due to Bilateral Aural Atresia: Surgical Technique and Audiological Results

Brito¹,

Ventura²,

Jorge³

et al. 2016

Int Adv Otol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVE:To demonstrate the surgical technique and audiological results of a middle ear implant for restoring hearing in patients with bilateral aural atresia and microtia with conductive or mixed hearing loss. MATERIALS and METHODS:In this prospective study, 12 subjects aged 12 years and older presenting with hearing loss and bilateral congenital aural atresia underwent surgical insertion of a middle ear implant. The patients underwent tympanomastoidectomy with a wide opening of the attic and preservation of the roof of the atresic tympanic bone to expose the middle ear and position the floating mass transducer of the implant.RESULTS: There were no intraoperative or postoperative complications. The hearing threshold averages in a free field were 53.5 dB preoperatively and 25.6 dB postoperatively. Monosyllabic word recognition averaged 61% preoperatively and 91.3% postoperatively. The average speech perception in quiet conditions during the hearing in noise test improved from 67.11 dB to 45.99 dB, and the signal-to-noise ratio improved from 5.64 to 1.31. CONCLUSION:The tested system is an excellent option for auditory rehabilitation of conductive hearing loss due to bilateral ear atresia. The surgery is well structured and safe and provides several alternatives to the surgeon, which is valuable in difficult cases.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

An Implantable Hearing System As Rehabilitation for Hearing Loss Due to Bilateral Aural Atresia: Surgical Technique and Audiological Results

Brito¹,

Ventura²,

Jorge³

et al. 2016

Int Adv Otol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Otological indications include congenital malformations of the external ear canal and middle ear, acquired canal stenosis, otosclerosis who are unfit surgical candidates. It also includes those with chronically discharging ear or recurrent otitis externa [4,5]. Audiological indications comprise of those with conductive or mixed hearing loss and those with single sided sensorineural deafness whereby the device picks up sound on the deaf side and transmit via bone conduction to the contralateral intact cochlea [4,5].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It also includes those with chronically discharging ear or recurrent otitis externa [4,5]. Audiological indications comprise of those with conductive or mixed hearing loss and those with single sided sensorineural deafness whereby the device picks up sound on the deaf side and transmit via bone conduction to the contralateral intact cochlea [4,5]. Relatively little has been published about the difficulties encountered during the insertion of osseointegrated implants for the attachment of bone anchored hearing aids (Baha) or the complications encountered after surgery [6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surgical Outcome of Bone Anchored Hearing Aid (Baha) Implant Surgery: A 10 Years Experience

Asma

Ubaidah

Hasan

et al. 2013

Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bone anchored hearing aid (Baha) implant is an option for patient with canal atresia, single sided deafness(SSD) and chronically discharging ears despite treatments. This retrospective study was conducted from 2001 to 2011 to evaluate the surgical outcome of Baha implant surgery. Thirty-three patients were identified during this study period. Their age at implantation ranged from 5 to 40 years. Of 33 patients, 29 (87.9 %) patients had bilateral microtia and canal atresia, 3 (9.1 %) patients had unilateral microtia and canal atresia and 1 (3.0 %) patients have SSD following labyrinthitis. One patient (3.2 %) had major complication which is lost of implant due to failure of osseointegration. Soft tissue reactions were seen 7 patients (21.1 %). Of these 7 patients, 4 patients required 3-4 procedures as day care operation for excision of the skin overgrowth surrounding the abutment. Recurrent antibiotic treatment was required in 3 patients (9.7 %). None of our patient had history of intraoperative or peri-operative complication following Baha surgery. The commonest complications are local infection and inflammation at the implant site. None of our patient had history of intraoperative or peri-operative complication following Baha implant surgery.

show abstract

“…Studies have shown that patients with percutaneous bone conduction implant systems and conductive or mixed hearing loss experience a significant improvement in hearing and speech identification scores, with air-bone gap closure in 80-85 % of patients [8,9]. Subjectively, patients with a percutaneous system tend to note satisfaction with the device [8,9].…”

Section: Surgery and Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Subjectively, patients with a percutaneous system tend to note satisfaction with the device [8,9]. McNeil and colleagues investigated the subjective outlook of these osseointegrated implants on the recipient's spouse or partner by having them fill out the Hearing Handicap Inventory for Adults Screening (HHIA-S) questionnaire [10].…”

Section: Surgery and Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implantable Hearing Devices

Kozlowski

Friedland

2014

Curr Surg Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are many barriers that prevent the use of traditional acoustic amplification including anatomic and medical conditions and patient preference. Implantable hearing devices typically avoid the use of the ear canal and can overcome many of these barriers. Current options include partially and fully implantable devices, devices that make use of bone conduction, devices that directly couple to the ossicular chain, and those that provide more direct cochlear stimulation. This article reviews the major devices that are currently available or in development providing information regarding clinical indications, device components, the general surgical procedure, and typical outcomes. This review should help the clinician understand device options to fit specific patient anatomy and amplification needs.

show abstract

Hearing Rehabilitation Using the BAHA Bone-Anchored Hearing Aid: Results in 40 Patients

Cited by 120 publications

References 10 publications

An Implantable Hearing System As Rehabilitation for Hearing Loss Due to Bilateral Aural Atresia: Surgical Technique and Audiological Results

An Implantable Hearing System As Rehabilitation for Hearing Loss Due to Bilateral Aural Atresia: Surgical Technique and Audiological Results

Surgical Outcome of Bone Anchored Hearing Aid (Baha) Implant Surgery: A 10 Years Experience

Implantable Hearing Devices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About