Literature DB >> 18758391

Skin reactions after BAHA surgery: a comparison between the U-graft technique and the BAHA dermatome.

Joacim Stalfors1, Anders Tjellström.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare and evaluate 2 surgical methods for handling the soft tissues in Bone-Anchored Hearing Aid (BAHA) surgery: the U-graft technique versus the dermatome designed for BAHA site preparation.
BACKGROUND: Skin reactions surrounding the percutaneous titanium abutment of the BAHA are a matter of clinical concern. Excessive residual soft tissue surrounding the implant is thought to be the principal cause of this complication. To address the challenge of adequately thinning the soft tissue, a dermatome has been introduced to facilitate BAHA site preparation.
METHODS: All patients fitted with a BAHA between 2001 and 2004 at our clinic were included in the study. Resection of soft tissue associated with the use of the U-graft technique or the dermatome was documented. At follow-up, skin reactions were registered according to Holgers. Here, we comparatively analyze the fate of the implant site according to the soft tissue resection technique used.
RESULTS: We used a U-shaped graft in 45 patients; the dermatome was used in 25 patients. A total of 373 observations were recorded in follow-up. In the U-shaped graft group, 29 (64%) of 45 patients experienced no adverse skin reactions. In the BAHA dermatome group, 21 (84%) of the 25 patients experienced no skin reactions. The difference in adverse skin reactions between the 2 groups was 19.6% (p = 0.14; 95% confidence interval, -3.6 to 42.7%).
CONCLUSION: The BAHA dermatome is a tool, which achieves BAHA skin-healing outcomes at least as good as U-graft flaps created by long-experienced BAHA surgeons. Perhaps, this tool allow other BAHA surgeons to achieve similar outcomes without having to experience as many skin reactions as occurred in the evolution of skin management around BAHA abutments.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18758391     DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0b013e318185fabc

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Otol Neurotol        ISSN: 1531-7129            Impact factor:   2.311


  15 in total

1.  Results and complications of the Baha system (bone-anchored hearing aid).

Authors:  G Ricci; A Della Volpe; M Faralli; F Longari; M Gullà; N Mansi; A Frenguelli
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2010-06-10       Impact factor: 2.503

2.  Skin reactions following BAHA surgery using the skin flap dermatome technique.

Authors:  Vincent Van Rompaey; Gerd Claes; Nadia Verstraeten; Joost van Dinther; Andrzej Zarowski; Erwin Offeciers; Thomas Somers
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2010-10-26       Impact factor: 2.503

Review 3.  A systematic review on skin complications of bone-anchored hearing aids in relation to surgical techniques.

Authors:  Shwan Mohamad; Imran Khan; S Y Hey; S S Musheer Hussain
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2014-12-14       Impact factor: 2.503

Review 4.  Punch vs open surgical techniques for placement of bone-anchored hearing implants: a systematic review and meta-analysis of skin reactions and operating time.

Authors:  Qianyu Xiao; Fanghua Gong; Ning Wang; Weihua Hu
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2021-01-02       Impact factor: 2.503

5.  Surgical Solution for the Transformation of the Percutaneous Bone Anchored Hearing Aid to a Transcutaneous System in Complicated Cases.

Authors:  Zsofia Bere; Gabor Vass; Adam Perenyi; Zoltan Tobias; Laszlo Rovo
Journal:  J Int Adv Otol       Date:  2020-12       Impact factor: 1.017

6.  Laser-Doppler microvascular measurements in the peri-implant areas of different osseointegrated bone conductor implant systems.

Authors:  János Jarabin; Zsófia Bere; Petra Hartmann; Ferenc Tóth; József Géza Kiss; László Rovó
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2014-12-12       Impact factor: 2.503

7.  Modified Baha Punch Technique: Least Invasive, Shortest Time and No Suturing.

Authors:  Hassan Alshehri; Abdulrahman Alsanosi; Osama Majdalawieh
Journal:  Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2015-12-12

8.  Predisposing factors for adverse skin reactions with percutaneous bone anchored hearing devices implanted with skin reduction techniques.

Authors:  Claudia Candreia; Ruth Birrer; Susanna Fistarol; Martin Kompis; Marco Caversaccio; Andreas Arnold; Christof Stieger
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2016-06-01       Impact factor: 2.503

9.  Percutaneous bone-anchored hearing implant surgery: dermatome versus linear incision technique.

Authors:  Ruben M Strijbos; Steven J H Bom; Stefan Zwerver; Myrthe K S Hol
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2016-07-20       Impact factor: 2.503

10.  Percutaneous bone-anchored hearing implant surgery without soft-tissue reduction: up to 42 months of follow-up.

Authors:  Shyam Singam; Richard Williams; Clair Saxby; Finn P Houlihan
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 2.311

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.