Literature DB >> 22072259

Experience with vibroplasty couplers at the stapes head and footplate.

Thomas Beleites1, Marcus Neudert, Dirk Beutner, Karl-Bernd Hüttenbrink, Thomas Zahnert.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To report on experiences with implanting the Vibrant Soundbridge (VSB) coupled to the stapes head using a new Clip-Coupler or to the stapes footplate using a new OW-Coupler (CliP- or OW-Coupler Vibroplasty). STUDY
DESIGN: Single subject, repeated measures.
SETTING: Two university hospital ENT departments. PATIENTS: Fourteen German-speaking patients from 2 European study sites were implanted with either a CliP-Coupler or OW-Coupler attached to a VSB floating mass transducer (FMT). They were evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively for bone and air conduction thresholds with and without the implant, as well as speech perception tests. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Measuring the efficacy and safety of OW- and CliP-Coupler-Vibroplasty as a method to treat mixed hearing loss.
RESULTS: Bone conduction thresholds remained stable preoperatively and postoperatively. The patients' average speech perception performances at 65/80 dB (HL) increased from 0.8/13.8% to 63/82%. The pure tone audiograms showed an average improvement in air conduction thresholds after implantation with the VSB of 25 dB at 0.5 kHz to 50 dB at 4 kHz.
CONCLUSION: OW- or Clip-Coupler-Vibroplasty using couplers was found to be a straightforward procedure, which produced good results in this group of patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22072259     DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0b013e3182380621

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


  6 in total

1.  Presentation of floating mass transducer and Vibroplasty couplers on CT and cone beam CT.

Authors:  Robert Mlynski; Thi Dao Nguyen; Stefan K Plontke; Sabrina Kösling
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2013-03-26       Impact factor: 2.503

2.  Oval and round window vibroplasty: a comparison of hearing results, risks and failures.

Authors:  Andrea Canale; Federico Dagna; Claudia Cassandro; Pamela Giordano; Federico Caranzano; Michelangelo Lacilla; Roberto Albera
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2013-10-11       Impact factor: 2.503

3.  Bilateral use of active middle ear implants: speech discrimination results in noise.

Authors:  Astrid Wolf-Magele; Viktor Koci; Johannes Schnabl; Patrick Zorowka; Herbert Riechelmann; Georg Mathias Sprinzl
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2015-09-19       Impact factor: 2.503

Review 4.  Efficacy of Auditory Implants for Patients With Conductive and Mixed Hearing Loss Depends on Implant Center.

Authors:  Ad Snik; Hannes Maier; Bill Hodgetts; Martin Kompis; Griet Mertens; Paul van de Heyning; Thomas Lenarz; Arjan Bosman
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 2.311

5.  A case of the vibrant soundbridge stapes coupler in patients with mixed hearing loss.

Authors:  Ah Young Park; Ju Hyun Jeon; In Seok Moon; Jae Young Choi
Journal:  Korean J Audiol       Date:  2014-09-16

Review 6.  ACTIVE MIDDLE EAR VIBRANT SOUNDBRIDGE SOUND IMPLANT.

Authors:  Alan Pegan; Mihael Ries; Jakov Ajduk; Vladimir Bedeković; Mirko Ivkić; Robert Trotić
Journal:  Acta Clin Croat       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 0.780

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.