Search

Introduction: Bone conduction implants have been indicated for patients with conductive hearing loss, mixed hearing loss, and even profound unilateral sensorineural hearing loss. With the introduction of Bonebridge®, new transcutaneous implant options emerged. The latest is Osia®, a direct-drive variant or active systems, where the implant directly generates and applies vibration to the bone. Materials and Methods: Retrospective study of two cohorts of patients treated with active bone conduction implants at a single center, one with the Bonebridge® device and the other with Osia®. Outcomes: Fourteen patients were included, seven in each group (n = 14). The Bonebridge® group showed an average hearing gain in tonal intelligibility thresholds of 32.43 ± 21.39 dB and a gain in the average intelligibility threshold (with 50% discrimination) of 26.29 ± 19.10 dB. In the Osia® group, there was a gain in average tonal thresholds of 41.49 ± 14.16 dB and 23.72 ± 6.98 dB in average intelligibility thresholds. Both devices contributed to improvements in patients' quality of life, as assessed with APHAB in all the variables studied in the test. Both devices offer rehabilitation for hearing loss as an alternative to hearing aids. The Osia® system shows statistically significant (p < 0.05) improvements in mid and high frequencies, but Bonebridge® slightly outperforms in speech understanding at 50%. Differences in average tonal thresholds and quality of life are not statistically significant. Conclusions: While auditory improvement is observed postimplantation, other aspects, such as intelligibility thresholds and quality of life, lack statistical significance. Given the limited experience with Osia® and the small sample size, the choice of the device should be personalized. Although the literature is inconsistent due to small sample sizes and variable approaches, some studies suggest potential advantages of the Osia® system, especially in speech comprehension in different environments and greater hearing gain compared to Bonebridge®. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Older adults with mild or no hearing loss make more errors and expend more effort listening to speech. Cochlear implants (CI) restore hearing to deaf patients but with limited fidelity. We hypothesized that patient-reported hearing and health-related quality of life in CI patients may similarly vary according to age. Speech Spatial Qualities (SSQ) of hearing scale and Health Utilities Index Mark III (HUI) questionnaires were administered to 543 unilaterally implanted adults across Europe, South Africa, and South America. Data were acquired before surgery and at 1, 2, and 3 years post-surgery. Data were analyzed using linear mixed models with visit, age group (18–34, 35–44, 45–54, 55–64, and 65+), and side of implant as main factors and adjusted for other covariates. Tinnitus and dizziness prevalence did not vary with age, but older groups had more preoperative hearing. Preoperatively and postoperatively, SSQ scores were significantly higher (Δ0.75–0.82) for those aged <45 compared with those 55+. However, gains in SSQ scores were equivalent across age groups, although postoperative SSQ scores were higher in right-ear implanted subjects. All age groups benefited equally in terms of HUI gain (0.18), with no decrease in scores with age. Overall, younger adults appeared to cope better with a degraded hearing before and after CI, leading to better subjective hearing performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To assess subjectively perceived, real-world benefits longitudinally for unilateral cochlear implant (CI) recipients in a multinational population treated routinely. To identify possible predictors of self-reported benefits.Design: This was a prospective, multicenter, repeated-measures study. Self-assessment of performance at preimplantation and postimplantation at 1, 2, and 3 years using standardized, validated, local language versions of the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ), and the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3) was performed. Outcomes were analyzed using a longitudinal mixed-effects model incorporating country effect. Patient demographics were explored for associations with change over time.Subjects: Two hundred ninety-one routinely treated, unilateral CI recipients, aged 13-81 years, from 9 clinics across 4 countries.Results: Highly significant improvements were observed for all outcome measures (p < 0.0001). Postimplantation, mean outcome scores remained stable beyond 1 year, with notable individual variability. A significant association for one or more outcomes with preimplantation contralateral hearing aid use, telephone use, age at implantation, implantation side, preimplantation comorbidities, dizziness, and tinnitus was observed (p < 0.004).Conclusions: Longitudinal benefits of CI treatment can be measured using clinically standardized self-assessment tools to provide a holistic view of patient-related benefits in routine clinical practice for aggregated data from multinational populations. Self-reported outcomes can provide medical-based evidence regarding CI treatment to support decision-making by health service providers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The study aim was to determine the benefit of cochlear implantation and hearing aids in older adults diagnosed with hearing loss and to evaluate the index of depression, anxiety and quality of life after such treatments. A retrospective cohort comprised 117 patients older than 65 years and diagnosed with moderate to profound hearing loss who were included and classified into 2 groups (treated vs. non-treated). A battery of tests including auditory (pure-tone average, disyllabic words in quiet at 65 dB SPL) and findings from a series of questions relevant to quality of life were compared between both groups. Auditory outcomes for disyllabic words were 58.21% for the cochlear implant-treated group and 82.8% for the hearing aid-treated group. There was a positive effect on anxiety, depression, health status and quality of life in the cochlear implant group versus the profound hearing loss control group. We conclude that older adults with moderate to profound hearing loss gain benefit from hearing aids or cochlear implants not only in terms of improved hearing function, but also in terms of positive effects on anxiety, depression, health status and quality of life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Conclusion: Patients with cochlear implants should be treated no differently than non-implanted patients with similar symptomatology. Objectives: To describe the spectrum of symptomatology, treatment, and long-term follow-up of patients with cochlear implant and vestibular complaints. Methods: This retrospective study included 25 patients with late onset vestibular complaints (more than 1 month post-implantation). Each patient underwent an extensive interrogatory and physical exam with ancillary test to complete a diagnosis. Treatment was given according to this and all patients followed a vestibular rehabilitation program. Results: The total population was 72% male and 28% female, median age was 58 years; minimal follow-up was 9 months (mean = 51, median = 34). Cochleostomy was performed in eight cases and round window insertion was performed in 19 (two patients were removed from each group in the analysis due to their bilateral implantation under a different approach). The mean time from implant to vestibular symptoms was 53 months, median = 32; a Kaplan Meier graphic showed the round window approach has faster onset of symptoms with statistical significance (p = 0.020). The most common complaint was instability in all patients and after both surgical approaches. No difference in symptoms was found with a Kruskall Wallis test except for vertigo spells (more common in the round window approach). In 12 patients the symptomatology was attributed to the implanted side. In the long-term follow-up a relatively high number of patients (20/25) recovered with standard treatment, suggesting the presence of the implant is not associated with poor recovery prognosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Bone conduction implants have been indicated for patients with conductive hearing loss, mixed hearing loss, and even profound unilateral sensorineural hearing loss. With the introduction of Bonebridge®, new transcutaneous implant options emerged. The latest is Osia®, a direct-drive variant or active systems, where the implant directly generates and applies vibration to the bone. Materials and Methods: Retrospective study of two cohorts of patients treated with active bone conduction implants at a single center, one with the Bonebridge® device and the other with Osia®. Outcomes: Fourteen patients were included, seven in each group (n = 14). The Bonebridge® group showed an average hearing gain in tonal intelligibility thresholds of 32.43 ± 21.39 dB and a gain in the average intelligibility threshold (with 50% discrimination) of 26.29 ± 19.10 dB. In the Osia® group, there was a gain in average tonal thresholds of 41.49 ± 14.16 dB and 23.72 ± 6.98 dB in average intelligibility thresholds. Both devices contributed to improvements in patients' quality of life, as assessed with APHAB in all the variables studied in the test. Both devices offer rehabilitation for hearing loss as an alternative to hearing aids. The Osia® system shows statistically significant (p < 0.05) improvements in mid and high frequencies, but Bonebridge® slightly outperforms in speech understanding at 50%. Differences in average tonal thresholds and quality of life are not statistically significant. Conclusions: While auditory improvement is observed postimplantation, other aspects, such as intelligibility thresholds and quality of life, lack statistical significance. Given the limited experience with Osia® and the small sample size, the choice of the device should be personalized. Although the literature is inconsistent due to small sample sizes and variable approaches, some studies suggest potential advantages of the Osia® system, especially in speech comprehension in different environments and greater hearing gain compared to Bonebridge®. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction and Goals: During the last decade there have been multiple and relevant advances in conduction and mixed hearing loss treatment. These advances and the appearance of new devices have extended the indications for bone-conduction implants. The Scientific Committee of Audiology of the Sociedad Española de Otorrinolaringología y Cirugía de Cabeza y Cuello SEORL-CCC (Spanish Society of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery), together with the Otology and Otoneurology Committees, have undertaken a review of the current state of bone-conduction devices with updated information, to provide a clinical guideline on bone-conduction implants for otorhinolaryngology specialists, health professionals, health authorities and society in general., Methods: This clinical guideline on bone-conduction implants contains information on the following: 1) Definition and description of bone-conduction devices; 2) Current and upcoming indications for bone conduction devices: Magnetic resonance compatibility; 3) Organization requirements for a bone-conduction implant programme., Results and Conclusions: The purpose of this guideline is to describe the different bone-conduction implants, their characteristics and their indications, and to provide coordinated instructions for all the above-mentioned agents for decision making within their specific work areas., (Copyright © 2018 Sociedad Española de Otorrinolaringología y Cirugía de Cabeza y Cuello. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)