Literature DB >> 27250841

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

Claudia Candreia1,2,3, Ruth Birrer4, Susanna Fistarol5, Martin Kompis4, Marco Caversaccio4,6, Andreas Arnold4,6, Christof Stieger4,6,7.   

Abstract

We present an analysis of adverse events after implantation of bone anchored hearing device in our patient population with focus on individual risk factors for peri-implant skin reactions. The investigation involved a chart review of adult Baha patients (n = 179) with 203 Bahas implanted with skin reduction techniques between 1993 and 2009, a questionnaire (n = 97) and a free clinical examination (n = 47). Skin reactions were graded by severity from 0 (no skin reaction) to 4 (implant loss resulting from infection) according to Holgers. We analyzed the skin reaction rate (SRR) defined as the number of skin reactions per year and the worst Holgers grade (WHG), which indicates the grade of the worst skin reaction per implant. We defined 20 parameters including the demographic characteristics, surgery details, subjective benefits, handling and individual factors. The most frequent adverse events (85 %) were skin reactions. The average SRR was 0.426 per Baha year. Six parameters showed an association with the SRR or the WHG. The clinically most relevant factors are an elevated Body Mass Index (BMI, p = 0.02) and darker skin type (p = 0.03). The SRR increased with the distance between the tragus and the implant (p = 0.02). Regarding the identified risk factors, the SRR might be reduced by selecting a location for the implant near the pinna and by specific counseling regarding post-operative care for patients with darker skin type or an elevated Body Mass Index (BMI). Few of the factors analyzed were found to influence the SRR and WHG. Since most adverse skin reactions could be treated easily with local therapy, our results suggest that in adult patients, individual risk factors for skin reactions are not a contraindication for Baha implantation. Thus, patients can be selected purely on audiological criteria.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Implants; Otology; Risk factors; Skin reactions

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27250841     DOI: 10.1007/s00405-016-4106-2

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


  34 in total

1.  Evaluation of implant losses and skin reactions around extraoral bone-anchored implants: A 0- to 8-year follow-up.

Authors:  R A Reyes; A Tjellström; G Granström
Journal:  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 3.497

2.  Ten years of experience with the Swedish bone-anchored hearing system.

Authors:  B Håkansson; G Lidén; A Tjellström; A Ringdahl; M Jacobsson; P Carlsson; B E Erlandson
Journal:  Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl       Date:  1990-10

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

Authors:  Joacim Stalfors; Anders Tjellström
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 2.311

4.  Wound related complications following full thickness skin graft versus split thickness skin graft on patients with bone anchored hearing aids.

Authors:  G K Lekakis; A Najuko; P G Gluckman
Journal:  Clin Otolaryngol       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 2.597

5.  Immunohistochemical study of the soft tissue around long-term skin-penetrating titanium implants.

Authors:  K M Holgers; P Thomsen; A Tjellström; L M Bjursten
Journal:  Biomaterials       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 12.479

6.  Long-term stability, survival, and tolerability of a novel osseointegrated implant for bone conduction hearing: 3-year data from a multicenter, randomized, controlled, clinical investigation.

Authors:  Rik C Nelissen; Joacim Stalfors; Maarten J F de Wolf; Mark C Flynn; Stina Wigren; Måns Eeg-Olofsson; Kevin Green; Michael P Rothera; Emmanuel A M Mylanus; Myrthe K S Hol
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 2.311

7.  Patient satisfaction and functional results with the bone-anchored hearing aid (BAHA).

Authors:  N Saroul; L Gilain; A Montalban; F Giraudet; P Avan; T Mom
Journal:  Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis       Date:  2011-05-20       Impact factor: 2.080

8.  [Keloid scars on black skin: myth or reality].

Authors:  K C Allah; S Yéo; H Kossoko; V Assi Djè Bi Djè; M Richard Kadio
Journal:  Ann Chir Plast Esthet       Date:  2012-04-27       Impact factor: 0.660

Review 9.  Candidacy for the bone-anchored hearing aid.

Authors:  Ad F M Snik; Arjan J Bosman; Emmanuel A M Mylanus; Cor W R J Cremers
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2004 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.854

10.  Bone-anchored hearing aid implant location in relation to skin reactions.

Authors:  Hubert T Faber; Maarten J F de Wolf; Jacky W J de Rooy; Myrthe K S Hol; Cor W R J Cremers; Emmanuel A M Mylanus
Journal:  Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2009-08
View more
  2 in total

1.  Multimodal Analysis of the Tissue Response to a Bone-Anchored Hearing Implant: Presentation of a Two-Year Case Report of a Patient With Recurrent Pain, Inflammation, and Infection, Including a Systematic Literature Review.

Authors:  Martin L Johansson; Tim G A Calon; Omar Omar; Furqan A Shah; Margarita Trobos; Peter Thomsen; Robert J Stokroos; Anders Palmquist
Journal:  Front Cell Infect Microbiol       Date:  2021-03-30       Impact factor: 5.293

2.  Speech Understanding and Sound Localization with a New Nonimplantable Wearing Option for Baha.

Authors:  Tom Gawliczek; Wilhelm Wimmer; Fabio Munzinger; Marco Caversaccio; Martin Kompis
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2018-09-25       Impact factor: 3.411

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.