Objective Osia is a new, transcutaneous, active bone-conduction implant. This study aimed to compare the BAHA Attract and the first-generation Osia system after BAHA Attract to Osia conversion surgery. Method Five patients who had previously used the BAHA Attract system were converted to the first generation of the Osia system. Surgical aspects of the two different systems, audiological performance and subjective opinions of the patients were investigated. Pure tone audiometry and speech audiometry in quiet was performed with each patient's BAHA 5 sound processor on Attract, and the test battery was repeated six weeks after the Attract to Osia conversion and at different time points after the first fitting. Details of the surgery and patients' feedback were analysed. Results Audiology tests showed significant improvement when using either system; however, the Osia system performance was better. Based on patient feedback, all the five implantees preferred the Osia system. Conclusion The study results suggest that the Osia system is a safe and powerful hearing implant that provides good clinical outcomes.

No abstract

No abstract

Purpose Continuous technological advances result in the availability of new bone conduction hearing implants, of which their suitability for pediatric patients is of major concern. The CochlearTMOsia® 2 is a new active osseointegrated steady-state implant system that uses digital piezoelectric stimulation to treat hearing loss. The implant in the United States was approved for patients aged 12 years and above, whereas the CE mark is independent of age, the only requirement is body weight of at least 7 kg. Therefore, further clinical studies are required to assess device characteristics in younger patients. The aim of our study was to perform a morphometric study among 5–12-year-old children, and to develop a surgical protocol for Osia 2 system implantation based on these findings. Methods We examined retrospectively cranial CT scans of 5–12-year-old patients from our clinical database. We measured the bone and soft-tissue thickness in the region of interest, and the position of the sigmoid sinus. 3D printed temporal bones were also used for planning. Results Soft-tissue thickness varied between 3.2 ± 0.5 mm and 3.6 ± 0.6 mm and bone thickness varied between 3.5 ± 1.1 mm and 4.7 ± 0.3 mm. The sigmoid sinus was located 1.3 ± 0.2 cm posterior to the ear canal, and the anterior distance was 4.8 ± 0.9 to 7.1 ± 1.1 mm. Conclusions Our morphometric studies showed that patients aged 5–12 have different anatomical dimensions compared to adults, but that implantation of the Osia 2 system is feasible in these patients using an altered implant positioning recommended by our data. The Cochlear™ Osia® 2 is, therefore, an option for hearing rehabilitation in younger pediatrics.

Introduction: The cochlear implants vary in electrodes in terms of length, width and proximity to the modiolus. The precurved electrode arrays could be placed closer to the modiolus and the ganglion cells compared to straight electrodes. The two types of electrode arrays provide different electrophysiological characteristics; however, proximity to the modiolus may lead to better hearing performance. Aim: To investigate our preliminary electrophysiological results that suggest that the Slim Modiolar (SM) electrode array has the potential to elicit similar neural responses as the thicker perimodiolar (Contour Advance, CA) electrode from the same generation of implants. Method: Subjects that were implanted either with CA or SM electrodes were enrolled, 54 consecutive subjects in each group. All electrodes were introduced into the cochlea via the round window. The diameter of the largest turn of the electrode arrays within the cochlea was measured through postoperative radiography. The energy consumption parameters were estimated 2 months after implantation. Results: The mean of the largest turns of the arrays within the cochlea was 4.2 ± 0.5 mm in the SM group and 4.9 ± 1.1 mm in the CA group. ‘Auto power’ was 44.81 ± 5.05% and 50.85 ± 8.35% with SM and CA, respectively. Estimated energy consumption was lower with SM. The differences were statistically significant. Conclusion: Our measurements for a large cohort in each group suggest that the SM electrode array takes a significantly closer position to the modiolus than the CA. This finding supports our earlier electrophysiological result and indicates better performance abilities. Orv Hetil. 2019; 160(31): 1216–1222.