Expanding the indications for the bone anchored hearing system (BAHS) in patients with single sided deafness

Implantable hearing devices in clinical practice. Systematic review and consensus statements

Objective

Implantable hearing devices represent a modern and innovative solution for hearing restoration. Over the years, these high-tech devices have increasingly evolved but their use in clinical practice is not universally agreed in the scientific literature. Congresses, meetings, conferences, and consensus statements to achieve international agreement have been made. This work follows this line and aims to answer unsolved questions regarding examinations, selection criteria and surgery for implantable hearing devices.

Materials and methods

A Consensus Working Group was established by the Italian Society of Otorhinolaryngology. A method group performed a systematic review for each single question to identify the current best evidence on the topic and to guide a multidisciplinary panel in developing the statements.

Results

Twenty-nine consensus statements were approved by the Italian Society of Otorhinolaryngology. These were associated with 4 key area subtopics regarding pre-operative tests, otological, audiological and surgical indications.

Conclusions

This consensus can be considered a further step forward to establish realistic guidelines on the debated topic of implantable hearing devices.

Long-Term Follow-Up in Active Transcutaneous Bone Conduction Implants

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate long-term outcomes of active transcutaneous bone conduction implants (atBCIs) regarding safety, hearing, and quality of life.

STUDY DESIGN

A clinical study with retrospective medical record analysis combined with prospective audiometry and quality of life questionnaires.

SETTING

Three secondary to tertiary care hospitals.

PATIENTS

All subjects operated with an atBCI in three regions in Sweden were asked for informed consent. Indications for atBCI were single-sided deafness (SSD) and conductive or mixed hearing loss (CMHL).

INTERVENTION

Evaluation of atBCI.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Pure tone and speech audiometry and Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI).

RESULT

Thirty-three subjects were included and 29 completed all parts. The total follow-up time was 124.1 subject-years. Nineteen subjects had CMHL and in this group, pure tone averages (PTA4) were 56.6 dB HL unaided and 29.6 dB HL aided, comparable with a functional gain of 26.0 dB. Effective gain (EG) was -12.7 dB. With bilateral hearing, Word Recognition Scores (WRS) in noise were 36.5% unaided and 59.1% aided. Fourteen subjects had SSD or asymmetric hearing loss (AHL) and in this group, PTA4 were >100 dB HL unaided and 32.1 dB HL aided with the contralateral ear blocked. EG was -9.1 dB. With bilateral hearing, WRSs were 53.2% unaided and 67.9% aided. The means of the total GBI scores were 31.7 for CMHL and 23.6 for SSD/AHL.

CONCLUSION

Few complications occurred during the study. The atBCI is concluded to provide a safe and effective long-term hearing rehabilitation.

Evaluating the effectiveness of bone conduction hearing implants in rehabilitation of hearing loss

PURPOSE

Implantable hearing devices are indicated for candidates who could not benefit from conventional hearing aids. This study aimed at evaluating their effectiveness in rehabilitation of hearing loss.

METHODS

This study included patients who received bone conduction implants at Tertiary Teaching Hospitals, between December 2018 and November 2020. Data were collected prospectively, and patients were assessed both subjectively using COSI and GHABP questionnaires and objectively using bone conduction and air conduction thresholds, unaided and aided free field speech thresholds. Outcomes of transcutaneous (tBCHD) and percutaneous (pBCHD) bone conduction hearing devices were compared as well as outcomes of unilateral versus bilateral fitting. Postoperative skin complications were recorded and compared.

RESULTS

A total of seventy patients were included, thirty-seven of them were implanted with tBCHD and thirty-three with pBCHD. Fifty-five patients were fitted unilaterally compared to 15 bilateral fitting. Preoperative mean of bone conduction (BC) of the overall sample was 23.27 ± 10.91 dB, the Air conduction (AC) mean was 69.27 ± 13.75 dB. There was significant difference between unaided free field speech score (88.51% ± 7.92) and the aided score (96.79 ± 2.38) with P value = 0.00001. The postoperative assessment using GHABP showed a benefit score mean of 70.95 ± 18.79, patient satisfaction score mean of 78.15 ± 18.39. The disability score improved significantly from a mean of 54.08 ± 15.26 to residual score of only 12.50 ± 10.22 with P < 0.00001 postoperatively. There was significant improvement in all parameters of COSI questionnaire following fitting. Comparison of pBCHDs vs tBCHDs showed a non-significant difference regarding FF speech as well as GHABP parameters. Comparison of the post-operative skin complications was in favor of tBCHDs as (86.5%) of the patients had normal skin postoperatively, compared to 45.5% of patients with pBCHDs devices. Bilateral implantation showed significant improvement of FF speech scores, GHABP satisfaction score, as well as COSI score results.

CONCLUSION

Bone conduction hearing devices are effective solution for rehabilitation of hearing loss. Bilateral fitting yields satisfactory outcomes in suitable candidates. Transcutaneous devices carry significantly lower skin complication rates compared to percutaneous devices.