Literature DB >> 23400404

Vibrant SoundBridge application to middle ear windows versus conventional hearing aids: a comparative study based on international outcome inventory for hearing aids.

Ahmet Atas1, Hakan Tutar, Bulent Gunduz, Yıldırım A Bayazıt.   

Abstract

In this study, we aimed to compare the outcomes of satisfaction of the patients who used hearing aids preceding the vibrant sound bridge (VSB) application on middle ear windows (14 oval window and 5 round window). Nineteen adult patients with conductive or mixed hearing loss were included in the study. All patients used behind the ear hearing aids on the site which was selected for VSB application. The patients used hearing aids for at least 3 months before the VSB operation. The floating mass transducer (FMT) was placed on one of the middle ear windows (oval or round) in VSB operation. The patients were evaluated with International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA) preoperatively after at least 3 months trial of conventional hearing aid and postoperatively after 3 months use of VSB. No perioperative problem was encountered. The total score of IOI-HA was significantly higher with VSB compared with conventional hearing aids (p < 0.05). No statistically significant difference was found between the daily use, residual activity limitations, satisfaction, impact on others, quality of life between middle ear implant and hearing aid (p > 0.05). The IOI-HA scores were significantly higher with the middle ear implant than the conventional hearing aid regarding benefit and residual participation restrictions (p < 0.05). Although the scores for quality of life assessment was similar between VSB and hearing aid use, there was a superiority of VSB in terms of benefit and residual participation restrictions as well as overall IOI-HA scores as the FMT was placed on one of the middle ear windows.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23400404     DOI: 10.1007/s00405-013-2387-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol        ISSN: 0937-4477            Impact factor:   2.503


  22 in total

1.  The vibrant soundbridge for conductive and mixed hearing losses: European multicenter study results.

Authors:  W-D Baumgartner; K Böheim; R Hagen; J Müller; T Lenarz; S Reiss; M Schlögel; R Mlynski; H Mojallal; V Colletti; J Opie
Journal:  Adv Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2010-07-05

2.  Hearing benefit of patients after Vibrant Soundbridge implantation.

Authors:  Ingo Todt; Rainer O Seidl; Arne Ernst
Journal:  ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec       Date:  2005-08-02       Impact factor: 1.538

3.  Application of active middle ear implants in patients with severe mixed hearing loss.

Authors:  Veronique J O Verhaegen; Jef J S Mulder; Cor W R J Cremers; Ad F M Snik
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 2.311

4.  Treatment of mixed hearing losses via implantation of a vibratory transducer on the round window.

Authors:  Vittorio Colletti; Sigfrid D Soli; Marco Carner; L Colletti
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 2.117

5.  Long-term results of bone-anchored hearing aid recipients who had previously used air-conduction hearing aids.

Authors:  Myrthe K S Hol; Ad F M Snik; Emmanuel A M Mylanus; Cor W R J Cremers
Journal:  Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2005-04

6.  A multicenter study of the Vibrant Soundbridge middle ear implant: early clinical results and experience.

Authors:  B Fraysse; J P Lavieille; S Schmerber; V Enée; E Truy; C Vincent; F M Vaneecloo; O Sterkers
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 2.311

7.  Coupling the Vibrant Soundbridge to cochlea round window: auditory results in patients with mixed hearing loss.

Authors:  Achille M Beltrame; Alessandro Martini; Silvano Prosser; Nadia Giarbini; Christian Streitberger
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 2.311

8.  Vibrant soundbridge versus conventional hearing aid in sensorineural high-frequency hearing loss: a prospective study.

Authors:  Eric Truy; Bénédicte Philibert; Jean-François Vesson; Samia Labassi; Lionel Collet
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 2.311

9.  Active middle ear implant compared with open-fit hearing aid in sloping high-frequency sensorineural hearing loss.

Authors:  Klaus Boeheim; Stefan-Marcel Pok; Max Schloegel; Peter Filzmoser
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 2.311

10.  A middle ear implant with a titanium canal wall prosthesis for a case of an open mastoid cavity.

Authors:  Arnaud Deveze; Charbel Rameh; Mélanie Sanjuan; Jean-Pierre Lavieille; Jacques Magnan
Journal:  Auris Nasus Larynx       Date:  2010-02-18       Impact factor: 1.863

View more
  7 in total

Review 1.  [Active hearing implants in chronic otitis media].

Authors:  S Lailach; C Müller; N Lasurashvili; H Seidler; T Zahnert
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2021-06       Impact factor: 1.284

Review 2.  [Differential indication of active middle ear implants].

Authors:  K Braun; H-P Zenner; N Friese; A Tropitzsch
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 1.284

3.  Round Window Application of an Active Middle Ear Implant: A Comparison With Hearing Aid Usage in Japan.

Authors:  Satoshi Iwasaki; Shin-Ichi Usami; Haruo Takahashi; Yukihiko Kanda; Tetsuya Tono; Katsumi Doi; Kozo Kumakawa; Kiyofumi Gyo; Yasushi Naito; Sho Kanzaki; Noboru Yamanaka; Kimitaka Kaga
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 2.311

4.  Modified Power Piston Versus Simultaneous Stapedotomy With Hearing Aids in Otosclerosis: A Follow-Up Study Exploring Speech Recognition, Quality of Life and Usage of Device.

Authors:  Daniel Dejaco; David Riedl; Anna Elisabeth Cassar; Timo Gottfried; Thomas Rasse; Natalie Fischer; Armina Kreuzer-Simonyan; Josef Seebacher; Herbert Riechelmann; Thomas Keintzel; Joachim Schmutzhard
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2022-04-01       Impact factor: 2.311

5.  Subjective Sound Quality Detection (HISQUI) over Time after Vibrant Soundbridge Implantation.

Authors:  Christof Buhl; Valeria Schindler; Flurin Pfiffner; Dorothe Veraguth; Alexander Huber; Christof Röösli
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-03-25       Impact factor: 4.241

6.  Results of Active Middle Ear Implantation in Patients With Mixed Hearing Loss After Middle Ear Surgery: A Prospective Multicenter Study (the ROMEO Study).

Authors:  Chan Il Song; Hyong-Ho Cho; Byung Yoon Choi; Jae Young Choi; Jin Woong Choi; Yun-Hoon Choung; Jong Woo Chung; Won-Ho Chung; Sung Hwa Hong; Yehree Kim; Byung Don Lee; Il-Woo Lee; Jong Dae Lee; Jun Ho Lee; Kyu-Yup Lee; Il Joon Moon; In Seok Moon; Seung-Ha Oh; Hong Ju Park; Shi Nae Park; Ji Won Seo
Journal:  Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2021-04-09       Impact factor: 3.372

7.  Real-World Effectiveness of Wearable Augmented Reality Device for Patients With Hearing Loss: Prospective Study.

Authors:  Ul Gyu Han; Jung-Yup Lee; Ga-Young Kim; Mini Jo; Jaeseong Lee; Kyoung Ho Bang; Young Sang Cho; Sung Hwa Hong; Il Joon Moon
Journal:  JMIR Mhealth Uhealth       Date:  2022-03-23       Impact factor: 4.773

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.