Objectives:
The aim of this study is to investigate and compare the clinical outcomes of minimally invasive ponto surgery (MIPS) to the linear incision technique with soft tissue preservation (LIT-TP) for percutaneous bone-anchored hearing implants (BAHI).
Study Design:
Prospective cohort study with a historical control group.
Setting:
Tertiary referral center.
Patients:
Twenty-five patients were prospectively included in the test group. The control group consisted of 25 patients who previously participated in another clinical trial and already underwent BAHI surgery.
Intervention:
All patients were implanted with a 4.5-mm-wide implant, using MIPS in the test group and the LIT-TP in the control group. Follow-up visits were scheduled 7 days, 21 days (sound processor fitting), 12 weeks and 6 months after surgery.
Main Outcome Measures:
The primary outcome measure was skin sensibility around the abutment 6 months after surgery. Secondary outcomes were subjective numbness, surgery time, wound healing, adverse soft tissue reactions, cosmetic outcomes, implant stability quotient (ISQ), implant survival, and sound processor use.
Results:
Skin sensibility, adverse soft tissue reactions, and sound processor use were comparable between groups. The test group had a shorter surgery time and better cosmetic outcomes. More skin dehiscences and a statistically nonsignificant higher implant loss rate (12% vs 0%, p = 0.079) were observed in the test group.
Conclusion:
MIPS is comparable to the LIT-TP regarding skin sensibility at 6 months and soft tissue tolerability. With MIPS, surgery time is further reduced and better cosmetic outcomes are reported. More research into MIPS, exact drill protocol, used instruments, and associated implant loss is warranted.
Our treatment outcomes are consistent with literature. Post-operative radiotherapy seems to be associated with improved local control despite advanced disease and positive margin status in this treatment group.
Purpose
To investigate sound localization in patients bilaterally fitted with bone conduction devices (BCDs). Additionally, clinically applicable methods to improve localization accuracy were explored.
Methods
Fifteen adults with bilaterally fitted percutaneous BCDs were included. At baseline, sound localization, (un)aided pure-tone thresholds, device use, speech, spatial and qualities of hearing scale (SSQ) and York hearing-related quality of life (YHRQL) questionnaire were measured. Settings to optimize sound localizing were added to the BCDs. At 1 month, sound localization was assessed again and localization was practiced with a series of sounds with visual feedback. At 3 months¸ localization performance, device use and questionnaire scores were determined again.
Results
At baseline, one patient with congenital hearing loss demonstrated near excellent localization performance and four other patients (three with congenital hearing loss) localized sounds (quite) accurately. Seven patients with acquired hearing loss were able to lateralize sounds, i.e. identify whether sounds were coming from the left or right side, but could not localize sounds accurately. Three patients (one with congenital hearing loss) could not even lateralize sounds correctly. SSQ scores were significantly higher at 3 months. Localization performance, device use and YHRQL scores were not significantly different between visits.
Conclusion
In this study, the majority of experienced bilateral BCD users could lateralize sounds and one third was able to localize sounds (quite) accurately. The localization performance was robust and stable over time. Although SSQ scores were increased at the last visit, optimizing device settings and a short practice session did not improve sound localization.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.