Long‐Term Outcome of Hearing Rehabilitation With An Active Middle Ear Implant

Abstract

Objective To assess the audiological and long‐term medical and technical follow‐up outcomes of an active middle ear implant. Methods This was a retrospective medical chart analysis of all patients provided with an active middle ear implant in a tertiary academic medical referral center between September 1, 1998, and July 31, 2015. Main outcome measures were medical and technical complications, revisions, reimplantations, explantations, coupling approaches, mean time of use, pre‐ and postoperative hearing thresholds, functional hearing gain across frequencies (250–4,000 Hz), and Freiburg monosyllablic word test at 65 dB. Results One hundred and three patients were identified. Fifteen were implanted bilaterally (n = 118 Vibrant Soundbridge devices [MED‐EL, Innsbruck, Austria]). Seventy‐seven devices were implanted for sensorineural and 41 for mixed and conductive hearing loss. Patients used the implant for 6.7 years (range 0.7 months–17.9 years) on average. Ninety‐one patients (77.12%) were using the device at the end of the observation period. An overall complication rate of 16.1% was observed. The revision and explantation rates were higher for devices implanted between 2004 and 2006. The device failure rate was 3.4%. Audiological evaluation showed significant hearing gains for both hearing loss patient groups. Conclusion This long‐term follow‐up reveals the reliability of the active middle ear implant in a single center. Overall complication rate and device failure rate are acceptable. The complication rate was higher during implementation of alternative coupling approaches. The audiological benefit was satisfactory in patients with all hearing loss types. The majority of implanted patients used the implant at the end of the observation period. Level of Evidence 4 Laryngoscope , 129:477–481, 2019

Long‐Term Stability and Safety of the Soundbridge Coupled to the Round Window

“…et al (4.0%). 10 None of our patients were revised due to postoperative infections, other studies showed infection rates of 2.5% and 8.3%, respectively. Furthermore, none of our patients required second surgery due to pain complications.…”

“…In total, 20 patients had revision surgery (10.2%). The here calculated revision rate was 15.2% as a result of the underlying pathology of reoccurring cholesteatoma and radical 10 The revision rate of VSB implantation with RW coupling was 29% in the 17 patients reviewed by Schraven et al 6 Our retrospectively analyzed results yielded a slightly lower revision rate of 15.8%. Emphasis needs to be placed on the fact that most of the patient cohort presented with several tympanoplasties performed elsewhere beforehand.…”

“…Few studies have shown long-term follow-up audiological results. 6,[9][10][11] Evidence for long-term audiological outcomes is still scarce and needs further research.…”

Medical, Technical and Audiological Outcomes of Hearing Rehabilitation with the Bonebridge Transcutaneous Bone-Conduction Implant: A Single-Center Experience

“…The implant loss for added up follow-up years is an outcome parameter which indicates the number of devices lost due to technical complications [19,20]. Given the fact that the follow-up period of patients implanted with the relatively new Bb in our study is fairly short, the result of one implant loss for 72 follow-up years should be quite satisfying (mean follow-up: 2.3 years).…”

The Influence of Piezoelectric Transducer Stimulating Sites on the Performance of Implantable Middle Ear Hearing Devices: A Numerical Analysis

“…Clinical study shows that the stimulating site influence the transducer’s hearing compensation performance [15]. To uncover this influence and optimize the transducer’s design, some preliminary studies have been carried out.…”