scholarly journals Minimal invasive pocket technique for magnet bone implant hearing aid without fixation

2019 ◽  
Vol 277 (3) ◽  
pp. 715-725
Author(s):  
Pierre Dolhen ◽  
Samuel Lipski ◽  
Rachid Touijar ◽  
Juliette Van Bogaert
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Surgical Technique ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Bone Conduction ◽  
Magnetic Coupling ◽  
Skin Incision ◽  
Medical Systems ◽  
Bone Implant ◽  
Mixed Hearing Loss ◽  
Baha Attract

Abstract Introduction The BAHA (bone-anchored hearing aid) Attract is a magnetic transcutaneous bone conduction device anchored into the temporal bone. The standard surgical technique for BAHA Attract is a multi-tools time-consuming process, which requires a large cutaneous incision. The objective of this study is to describe and test the feasibility of a minimally invasive pocket (MIP) technique for Magnet Bone Implant Hearing Aid (MBIHA) with a modified magnet of BAHA Attract without fixation and without any tissue reduction. We use a 3-cm vertical skin incision and a subperiosteal pocket. Method A study of 10 patients with conductive or mixed hearing loss who benefited from a MBIHA using the MIP technique is presented. The pure tone average (PTA) (dB) for air-conduction thresholds and the speech recognition threshold (SRT) (dB) in speech audiometry in quiet are calculated. The Entific Medical Systems (EMS) questionnaire and the postoperative clinical outcomes are realized. Results We found a significant improvement of 33.8 dB on average for the PTA and 44.8 dB for the SRT with MBIHA at 3 months, compared with unaided situation. No implant was removed or displaced after 2 years of follow-up. The skin condition remains intact in all the cases. Conclusion The minimally subperiosteal pocket surgical technique MIP without fixation and with tissue preservation for the MBIHA is safe, rapid and effective for patients with conductive or mixed hearing loss. It opens new perspectives of development and modify conventional concept in magnetic coupling of bone-conducted device.

scholarly journals Vibrant Soundbridge and Bone Conduction Hearing Aid in Patients with Bilateral Malformation of External Ear

2015 ◽  
Vol 20 (01) ◽  
pp. 034-038 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Mondelli ◽  
Thais Mariano ◽  
Heitor Honório ◽  
Rubens Brito
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Perception ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Bone Conduction ◽  
External Ear ◽  
Vibrant Soundbridge ◽  
Mixed Hearing Loss ◽  
Bone Conduction Hearing ◽  
Bone Conduction Hearing Aid

Introduction Hearing loss is the most common clinical finding in patients with malformation of the external ear canal. Among the possibilities of treatment, there is the adaptation of hearing aids by bone conduction and the adaptation of implantable hearing aids. Objective To assess speech perception with the use of Vibrant Soundbridge (VBS - MED-EL, Innsbruck, Austria) associated with additional amplification in patients with bilateral craniofacial malformation. Method We evaluated 11 patients with bilateral malformation over 12 years with mixed hearing loss or bilateral conductive. They were using the Softband (Oticon Medical, Sweden) and bone conduction hearing aid in the ear opposite the one with the VSB. We performed the evaluation of speech perception using the Hearing in Noise Test. Results Participants were eight men and three women with a mean of 19.5 years. The signal / noise ratio presented significant results in patients fitted with VSB and bone conduction hearing aid. Conclusion The results of speech perception were significantly better with use of VBS combined with bone conduction hearing aids.

Evaluation of a New Powerful Bone-Anchored Hearing System: A Comparison Study

2013 ◽  
Vol 24 (06) ◽  
pp. 505-513 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arjan J. Bosman ◽  
Ad F.M. Snik ◽  
Myrthe K.S. Hol ◽  
Emmanuel A.M. Mylanus
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Perception ◽  
User Satisfaction ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Bone Conduction ◽  
Free Field ◽  
New Device ◽  
Mixed Hearing Loss ◽  
Bone Conduction Device

Background: The recent introduction of digital hearing aid technology for bone-conduction devices employing percutaneous stimulation may be beneficial for patients with conductive and mixed hearing loss and single sided deafness. Purpose: Performance of a recently released sound processor for bone-anchored implants, the Ponto Pro Power from Oticon Medical (bone-conduction device 2 [BCD2]), was compared with that of the Baha Intenso from Cochlear (bone-conduction device 1 [BCD1]). Research Design: Direct comparison of the subject's own device (BCD1) with the new device (BCD2) was examined in a nonrandomized design. Subjects were initially tested with BCD1. BCD2 was tested after a 4 wk acclimatization period. Study Sample: Eighteen subjects with mixed hearing loss and with at least 4 mo experience with BCD1 completed the study. Mean air-conduction and bone-conduction thresholds averaged across the frequencies of 500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz were 73.9 and 34.2 dB HL, respectively. Data Collection and Analysis: Performance of the two devices was evaluated objectively by measuring aided free-field thresholds, speech perception in quiet, and speech perception in noise. A subjective evaluation was carried out with the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) (Cox and Alexander, 1995) and the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) questionnaire (Gatehouse and Noble, 2004). In addition, user experiences, user satisfaction, and device preference were obtained via proprietary questionnaires. Statistical significance was established with analysis-of-variance (ANOVA) and paired t-statistics with Bonferroni correction. Results: Aided free-field thresholds and speech reception thresholds (SRTs) in quiet were not statistically significantly different for either device (p > 0.05). In contrast, SRTs in noise were 2.0 dB lower (p < 0.001) for BCD2 than for BCD1. APHAB questionnaire scores on all subscales provided statistically significantly greater benefit (p < 0.05) for BCD2 than for BCD1. Also, with the SSQ most items in the speech and sound quality domain were significantly more favorable (p < 0.05) for BCD2 than for BCD1. Finally, all subjects preferred BCD2 over BCD1 with 14 subjects reporting a strong preference and four subjects an average preference for the digital signal processing provided by BCD2 over previous technology provided by BCD1.

Improvement of bone conduction after stapes surgery in otosclerosis patients with mixed hearing loss depending from surgical technique

2009 ◽  
Vol 266 (8) ◽  
pp. 1225-1228 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alireza Karimi Yazdi ◽  
Amir Arvin Sazgar ◽  
Maziar Motiee ◽  
Mohammadtaghi Khorsandi Ashtiani
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Surgical Technique ◽  
Bone Conduction ◽  
Stapes Surgery ◽  
Mixed Hearing Loss

Piezoelectric bone conduction hearing implant Osia® - audiological and quality of life benefits

2021 ◽  
Vol 75 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Joanna Marszał ◽  
Renata Gibasiewicz ◽  
Magdalena Błaszczyk ◽  
Maria Gawlowska ◽  
Wojciech Gawęcki
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Bone Conduction ◽  
Speech Understanding ◽  
Mixed Hearing Loss ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Bone Conduction Hearing

Introduction: Nowadays, there are many options to treat hearing-impaired patients: tympanoplastic surgery, hearing aids and a wide range of implantable devices. Objective: The aim of this study is to present the mid-term audiological and quality of life benefits after the implantation of the Osia®, a new active piezoelectric bone conduction hearing implant. Material and methods: The state of the tissues in implanted area, as well as audiological and quality of life results were analyzed six, nine and twelve months after implantation in a group of four adult patients with bilateral mixed hearing loss. Results: In all the cases, no postoperative complications were found. One year after surgery the mean audiological gain in FF PTA4 (pure tone average for 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz) was 52.2±3.5 dB in comparison to the unaided situation, the mean speech understanding with Osia® in quiet was 90±8.2% for 50dB SPL, 98.8±2.5% for 65dB SPL and 100±0% for 80dB SPL, and mean speech understanding with Osia® in noise was 37.5%±23.6 for 50dB SPL, 93.8±4.8% for 65dB SPL and 98.8±2.5% for 80dB SPL. There was also an evident improvement in the quality of hearing as well as in the quality of life, measured by the APHAB (Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit) and the SSQ (Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale). Conclusions: The Osia® is an effective treatment option for patients with bilateral mixed hearing loss. The mid-term audiological and quality of life results are excellent, but further observations including bigger groups of patients and a longer follow-up are required.

Sensorineural Impairment in Unilateral Otosclerosis

1975 ◽  
Vol 84 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fred H. Linthicum ◽  
A. S. Lalani
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Bone Conduction ◽  
Significant Elevation ◽  
Bone Conduction Threshold ◽  
Mixed Hearing Loss ◽  
Temporal Bones

Audiometric findings were evaluated in a group of patients with clinical unilateral otosclerosis. A comparison was made between bone conduction threshold in the better hearing ear and the ear with the mixed hearing loss. Over 50% of the patients had a significant elevation in the bone conduction thresholds in the ear with clinical otosclerosis as compared to the uninvolved ear. A pair of temporal bones from a patient with unilateral otosclerosis and unilateral mixed hearing loss is presented.

scholarly journals Hearing Aid Treatment for Patients with Mixed Hearing Loss. Part II: Speech Recognition in Comparison to Direct Acoustic Cochlear Stimulation

2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 133-142
Author(s):  
Nina Wardenga ◽  
Ad F.M. Snik ◽  
Eugen Kludt ◽  
Bernd Waldmann ◽  
Thomas Lenarz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Middle Ear ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Dynamic Range ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Middle Ear Surgery ◽  
Promising Alternative ◽  
Mixed Hearing Loss ◽  
Technical Specifications

Background: The conventional therapy for severe mixed hearing loss is middle ear surgery combined with a power hearing aid. However, a substantial group of patients with severe mixed hearing loss cannot be treated adequately with today’s state-of-the-art (SOTA) power hearing aids, as predicted by the accompanying part I of this publication, where we compared the available maximum power output (MPO) and gain from technical specifications to requirements for optimum benefit using a common fitting rule. Here, we intended to validate the theoretical assumptions from part I experimentally in a mixed hearing loss cohort fitted with SOTA power hearing aids. Additionally, we compared the results with an implantable hearing device that circumvents the impaired middle ear, directly stimulating the cochlea, as this might be a better option. Objectives: Speech recognition outcomes obtained from patients with severe mixed hearing loss supplied acutely with a SOTA hearing aid were studied to validate the outcome predictions as described in part I. Further, the results obtained with hearing aids were compared to those in direct acoustic cochlear implant (DACI) users. Materials and Methods: Twenty patients (37 ears with mixed hearing loss) were provided and fitted with a SOTA power hearing aid. Before and after an acclimatization period of at least 4 weeks, word recognition scores (WRS) in quiet and in noise were studied, as well as the speech reception threshold in noise (SRT). The outcomes were compared retrospectively to a second group of 45 patients (47 ears) using the DACI device. Based on the severity of the mixed hearing loss and the available gain and MPO of the SOTA hearing aid, the hearing aid and DACI users were subdivided into groups with prediction of sufficient, partially insufficient, or very insufficient hearing aid performance. Results: The patients with predicted adequate SOTA hearing aid performance indeed showed the best WRS in quiet and in noise when compared to patients with predicted inferior outcomes. Insufficient hearing aid performance at one or more frequencies led to a gradual decrease in hearing aid benefit, validating the criteria used here and in the accompanying paper. All DACI patients showed outcomes at the same level as the adequate hearing aid performance group, being significantly better than those of the groups with inadequate hearing aid performance. Whereas WRS in quiet and noise were sensitive to insufficient gain or output, showing significant differences between the SOTA hearing aid and DACI groups, the SRT in noise was less sensitive. Conclusions: Limitations of outcomes in mixed hearing loss individuals due to insufficient hearing aid performance can be accurately predicted by applying a commonly used fitting rule and the 35-dB dynamic range rule on the hearing aid specifications. Evidently, when outcomes in patients with mixed hearing loss using the most powerful hearing aids are insufficient, bypassing the middle ear with a powerful active middle ear implant or direct acoustic implant can be a promising alternative treatment.

Comparison of Sound Processing Strategies for Osseointegrated Bone Conduction Implants in Mixed Hearing Loss

2013 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 598-603 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jolien B. J. Desmet ◽  
Arjan J. Bosman ◽  
Ad F. M. Snik ◽  
Peggy Lambrechts ◽  
Myrthe K. S. Hol ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Bone Conduction ◽  
Sound Processing ◽  
Mixed Hearing Loss ◽  
Processing Strategies
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document