Literature DB >> 21774446

Fitting of an 8.5-millimeter abutment for bone conduction devices: indications and postintervention course.

Catharina A J Dun1, Myrthe K S Hol, Emmanuel A M Mylanus, Cor W R J Cremers.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: We present indications and clinical outcomes of fitting an 8.5-mm abutment for bone conduction devices.
METHODS: In 39 cases with a follow-up time of more than 12 months after fitting of an 8.5-mm abutment, the preintervention and postintervention courses were retrospectively evaluated. The outcome measures were indications for fitting and complications during the preintervention and postintervention courses (local skin reaction, skin level, revision surgery, and implant loss).
RESULTS: Soft tissue overgrowth was the most frequent reason (31 of 39 cases) for fitting the 8.5-mm abutment. Severe skin reactions decreased by 7.9% after fitting, and the number of fixtures that remained free of any skin reaction increased by 32.2%. In 7 cases, soft tissue overgrowth required revision surgery before placement of the 8.5-mm abutment; further surgical intervention was needed only once. In 1 case, the 8.5-mm abutment was removed because of recurring soft tissue problems. No spontaneous abutment or implant loss occurred.
CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective evaluation showed that fitting an 8.5-mm abutment is an easy step in managing soft tissue problems and preventing revision surgery. Also, it is of value in patients with a thick scalp that interferes with bone conduction device coupling. In these cases, we advise placing the 8.5-mm abutment during primary surgery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21774446     DOI: 10.1177/000348941112000607

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol        ISSN: 0003-4894            Impact factor:   1.547


  6 in total

1.  Percutaneous bone-anchored hearing implant surgery: linear incision technique with tissue preservation versus linear incision technique with tissue reduction.

Authors:  E H H van der Stee; R M Strijbos; S J H Bom; M K S Hol
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2018-05-30       Impact factor: 2.503

2.  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

3.  A new bone-anchored hearing implant: short-term retrospective data on implant survival and subjective benefit.

Authors:  Rik C Nelissen; Emmanuel A M Mylanus; Henricus P M Kunst; Ronald J E Pennings; Ad F M Snik; Myrthe K S Hol
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2013-01-29       Impact factor: 2.503

4.  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

5.  Three-year Outcomes of a Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing a 4.5-mm-Wide to a 3.75-mm-Wide Titanium Implant for Bone Conduction Hearing.

Authors:  Ivo J Kruyt; Rik C Nelissen; Emmanuel A M Mylanus; Myrthe K S Hol
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 2.311

6.  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

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.