Shaun Baker1, Aaron Centric2, Sri Kiran Chennupati3. 1. Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 2. Rideout Ear, Nose and Throat, Yurba City, CA, USA. 3. St. Christohper's Hospital for Children, Drexel University College of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Electronic address: Sri.chennupati@tenethealth.com.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Bone-anchored hearing devices are an accepted treatment option for hearing restoration in various types of hearing loss. Traditional devices have a percutaneous abutment for attachment of the sound processor that contributes to a high complication rate. Previously, our institution reported on the Sophono (Boulder, CO, USA) abutment-free system that produced similar audiologic results to devices with abutments. Recently, Cochlear Americas (Centennial, CO, USA) released an abutment-free bone-anchored hearing device, the BAHA Attract. In contrast to the Sophono implant, the BAHA Attract utilizes an osseointegrated implant. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to demonstrate patient benefit abutment-free devices, compare the results of the two abutment-free devices, and examine complication rates. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted for the first eleven Sophono implanted patients and for the first six patients implanted with the BAHA Attract at our institution. Subsequently, we analyzed patient demographics, audiometric data, clinical course and outcomes. RESULTS: Average improvement for the BAHA Attract in pure-tone average (PTA) and speech reception threshold (SRT) was 41dB hearing level (dBHL) and 56dBHL, respectively. Considering all frequencies, the BAHA Attract mean improvement was 39dBHL (range 32-45dBHL). The Sophono average improvement in PTA and SRT was 38dBHL and 39dBHL, respectively. The mean improvement with Sophono for all frequencies was 34dBHL (range 24-43dBHL). CONCLUSION: Significant improvements in both pure-tone averages and speech reception threshold for both devices were achieved. In direct comparison of the two separate devices using the chi-square test, the PTA and SRT data between the two devices do not show a statistically significant difference (p-value 0.68 and 0.56, respectively). The complication rate for these abutment-free devices is lower than that of those featuring the transcutaneous abutment, although more studies are needed to further assess this potential advantage.
INTRODUCTION: Bone-anchored hearing devices are an accepted treatment option for hearing restoration in various types of hearing loss. Traditional devices have a percutaneous abutment for attachment of the sound processor that contributes to a high complication rate. Previously, our institution reported on the Sophono (Boulder, CO, USA) abutment-free system that produced similar audiologic results to devices with abutments. Recently, Cochlear Americas (Centennial, CO, USA) released an abutment-free bone-anchored hearing device, the BAHA Attract. In contrast to the Sophono implant, the BAHA Attract utilizes an osseointegrated implant. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to demonstrate patient benefit abutment-free devices, compare the results of the two abutment-free devices, and examine complication rates. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted for the first eleven Sophono implanted patients and for the first six patients implanted with the BAHA Attract at our institution. Subsequently, we analyzed patient demographics, audiometric data, clinical course and outcomes. RESULTS: Average improvement for the BAHA Attract in pure-tone average (PTA) and speech reception threshold (SRT) was 41dB hearing level (dBHL) and 56dBHL, respectively. Considering all frequencies, the BAHA Attract mean improvement was 39dBHL (range 32-45dBHL). The Sophono average improvement in PTA and SRT was 38dBHL and 39dBHL, respectively. The mean improvement with Sophono for all frequencies was 34dBHL (range 24-43dBHL). CONCLUSION: Significant improvements in both pure-tone averages and speech reception threshold for both devices were achieved. In direct comparison of the two separate devices using the chi-square test, the PTA and SRT data between the two devices do not show a statistically significant difference (p-value 0.68 and 0.56, respectively). The complication rate for these abutment-free devices is lower than that of those featuring the transcutaneous abutment, although more studies are needed to further assess this potential advantage.
Authors: Jan Bouček; Jan Vokřál; Libor Černý; Martin Chovanec; Michal Zábrodský; Eduard Zvěřina; Jan Betka; Jiří Skřivan Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2016-08-16 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Jan Boucek; Jan Vokral; Libor Cerny; Martin Chovanec; Jiří Skrivan; Eduard Zverina; Jan Betka; Michal Zabrodsky Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2017-03-14 Impact factor: 2.503