MRI after Bonebridge implantation: a comparison of two implant generations

Contreras, Constantino; Gavilán, Javiér; García-Raya, Pilar; Calvino, Miryam; Lassaletta, Luis

doi:10.1007/s00405-020-06380-2

Cited by 15 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, the influence of the less widespread middle fossa approach for surgical placement of the BB on the MRI quality was evaluated. The results obtained by Utrilla et al [13] when the implant was placed on the mastoid are similar to those obtained in the present study. Artifact size after application of the metal artifact reduction sequences is comparable (6.3 cm versus 7.0 cm).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Influence of head orientation and implantation site of a novel transcutaneous bone conduction implant on MRI metal artifact reduction sequence

Talon

Wimmer

Hakim

et al. 2022

Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is often limited in patients with auditory implants because of the presence of metallic components and magnets. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical usefulness of a customized MRI sequence for metal artifact suppression in patients with BONEBRIDGETM BCI 602 implants (MED-EL, Innsbruck, Austria), the successor of the BCI 601 model. Methods Using our in-house developed and customized metal artifact reduction sequence (SEMAC-VAT WARP), MRI artifacts were evaluated qualitatively and quantitatively. MRI sequences were performed with and without artifact reduction on two whole head specimens with and without the BCI 602 implant. In addition, the influence of two different implantation sites (mastoid versus retrosigmoid) and head orientation on artifact presence was investigated. Results Artifact volume was reduced by more than the 50%. Results were comparable with those obtained with the BCI 601, showing no significant differences in the dimensions of artifacts caused by the implant. Conclusion SEMAC-VAT WARP was once more proved to be efficient at reducing metal artifacts on MR images. The dimensions of artifacts associated with the BCI 602 are not smaller than those caused by the BCI 601.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Influence of head orientation and implantation site of a novel transcutaneous bone conduction implant on MRI metal artifact reduction sequence

Talon

Wimmer

Hakim

et al. 2022

Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The upgrade gives the same power output for effective amplification, but with nearly 50% less drilling depth. The Bonebridge BCI 602 has the same audiological and medical criteria as the first-generation device [22,23].…”

Section: The New Bonebridgebci 602mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Bonebridge BCI 602 Active Transcutaneous Bone Conduction Implant in Children: Objective and Subjective Benefits

Cywka

Skarżyńśki

Król

et al. 2021

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: the Bonebridge hearing implant is an active transcutaneous bone conduction implant suitable for various types of hearing loss. It was first launched in 2012 as the BCI 601, with a newer internal part (BCI 602) released in 2019. With the new size and shape, the BCI 602 can be used in patients previously excluded due to insufficient anatomical conditions, especially in patients with congenital defects of the outer and middle ear. Objectives: the purpose of this study is to evaluate the objective and subjective benefits of the new Bonebridge BCI 602 in children who have hearing impairment due to conductive or mixed hearing loss. Safety and effectiveness of the device was assessed. Methods: the study group included 22 children aged 8–18 years (mean age 14.7 years) who had either conductive or mixed hearing loss. All patients were implanted unilaterally with the new Bonebridge BCI 602 implant. Pure tone audiometry, speech recognition tests (in quiet and noise), and free-field audiometry were performed before and after implantation. Word recognition scores were evaluated using the Demenko and Pruszewicz Polish Monosyllabic Word Test, and speech reception thresholds in noise were assessed using the Polish Sentence Matrix Test. The subjective assessment of benefits was carried outusing the APHAB (Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit) questionnaire. Results: after implantation of the Bonebridge BCI 602 all patients showed a statistically significant improvement in hearing and speech understanding. The mean word recognition score (WRS) changed from 12.1% before implantation to 87.3% after 6 months. Mean speech reception threshold (SRT) before implantation was +4.79 dB SNR and improved to −1.29 dB SNR after 6 months. All patients showed stable postoperative results. The APHAB questionnaire showed that difficulties in hearing decreased after implantation, with a statistically significant improvement in global score. Pre-operative scores (M = 35.7) were significantly worse than post-operative scores at 6 months (M = 25.7). Conclusions: the present study confirms that the Bonebridge BCI 602 is an innovative and effective solution, especially for patients with conductive and mixed hearing loss due to anatomical ear defects. The Bonebridge BCI 602 system provides valuable and stable audiological and surgical benefits. Subjective assessment also confirms the effectiveness of the BCI 602. The BCI 602 offers the same amplification as the BCI601, but with a smaller size. The smaller dimensions make it an effective treatment option for a wider group of patients, especially children with congenital defects of the outer and middle ear.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, technically, the active system of the BCI601 still poses the most advanced option in treating CHL, since it combines the benefit of direct stimulation (same audiological output as percutaneous systems) with the benefit of reduced skin complications of transcutaneous systems [ 10 ]. Compared to BAHA and Ponto percutaneous implants, the two main disadvantages of the BCI601 are the size of the implant that reduce the indications in young children and the artefact produced by the implant [ 11 ]. Even though the size of the BC-FMT in the new generation, the BCI602, was reduced, requiring a drilling depth compareable to that of a BAHA-screw, still in patients with comorbid intracranial tumour or cholesteatoma necessitating regular imaging control with MRI the artefact may is a disadvantage compared to percutaneous implants.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Even though the size of the BC-FMT in the new generation, the BCI602, was reduced, requiring a drilling depth compareable to that of a BAHA-screw, still in patients with comorbid intracranial tumour or cholesteatoma necessitating regular imaging control with MRI the artefact may is a disadvantage compared to percutaneous implants. Recent studies by Edlinger et al and Utrilla et al adressed this possible problem by investigating artefact reduction possibilities with the BCI602 and concluded, that with the application of artefact reduction sequences and certain anatomical placements also tumour- and cholesteatoma cases can be diagnosed succesfully [ 11 , 12 ]. Especially, the reduced depth of the implant makes pre-surgical planning redundant and with the new MRI possibilities open new possibilities for difficult anatomies as well as the option to implant children younger than 5 years of age [ 13 , 14 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Two Bonebridge bone conduction hearing implant generations: audiological benefit and quality of hearing in children

Šikolová

Urík

Hošnová

et al. 2021

Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The study aimed to evaluate audiological benefits, quality of hearing and safety of two Bonebridge generation: BCI601 and BCI602 (MED-EL, Innsbruck, Austria) in children. Methods Twelve children were implanted: five BCI601 and seven BCI602 comprising of ten conductive hearing loss, and two single sided deaf SSD subjects. Audiological outcomes tested were sound field audiometry, functional gain, speech recognition threshold (SRT50), speech recognition in noise (SPRINT) and localisation abilities. Subjective measures were Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ12). Results The mean FG with the BCI601 was 25.0 dB and with the BCI602 28.0 dB. The benefit in SRT50 was 23.2 dB and 33.8 dB, respectively. The mean benefit in SPRINT was 15% and 6.7% and the localisation ability improved from 33.3° to 16° and from 26.2° to 17.6°, respectively. The two SSD subjects reported a FG of 17 dB, a benefit in SRT50 of 22.5 and a benefit in SPRINT of 20%. Subjective outcomes improved significantly and even exceeded the values of their age-and sex matched normal hearing peers. One revision was reported: a retroauricular emphysema above the implant occurred 12 months post-OP, it was resolved operatively with the implant still being functional. Conclusion The pediatric cohort reports significant audiological benefit, even exceeding that of the age- and sex matched control. The combination of the high safety and audiological benefit makes the Bonebridge a comfortable and effective option in hearing rehabilitation in children.

show abstract

MRI after Bonebridge implantation: a comparison of two implant generations

Cited by 15 publications

References 18 publications

Influence of head orientation and implantation site of a novel transcutaneous bone conduction implant on MRI metal artifact reduction sequence

Influence of head orientation and implantation site of a novel transcutaneous bone conduction implant on MRI metal artifact reduction sequence

The Bonebridge BCI 602 Active Transcutaneous Bone Conduction Implant in Children: Objective and Subjective Benefits

Two Bonebridge bone conduction hearing implant generations: audiological benefit and quality of hearing in children

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About