Literature DB >> 30915542

Complications after round window vibroplasty.

Maurizio Barbara1,2, Luigi Volpini3, Edoardo Covelli3, Martina Romeo3, Chiara Filippi3, Simonetta Monini3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the complication rate in adult subjects with open cavities that were implanted with the Vibrant Soundbridge implant, using the round window (RW) vibroplasty procedure.
METHODS: From 2009 to 2014, 21 adult subjects with mixed hearing loss, all with sequel from open tympanoplasty surgery, underwent RW vibroplasty (RW-VPL). Surgical complications were recorded and a standard minimal approach was used as a basis for all the cases that needed revision.
RESULTS: The mean follow-up was 42 months (range 12-76). Complications occurred in nearly half of the cases and included: cable extrusion (23.8%), hardware failure (14.3%), profound hearing loss (9.5%), and inadequate RW coupling (9.5%). A minimal endaural approach (MEA) was used in the majority of the cases (86.7%), while the extended endaural approach was adopted for those patients requiring explantation with or without replacement (14.3%).
CONCLUSIONS: RW-VPL can be considered a possible option for the rehabilitation of auditory impairment derived from an open tympanoplasty procedure due to cholesteatoma. The procedure may lead to minor/major complications that may require a surgical revision. By adopting an MEA, it has been possible to manage all the situations in which functionality of the device is worth being preserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Active middle ear implant; Mixed hearing loss; Open tympanoplasty; Revision surgery; Round window coupling

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30915542     DOI: 10.1007/s00405-019-05402-y

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


  11 in total

1.  Electrocochleography in round window Vibrant Soundbridge implantation.

Authors:  Vittorio Colletti; Marco Mandalà; Liliana Colletti
Journal:  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2011-12-01       Impact factor: 3.497

2.  Round window vibroplasty: long-term results.

Authors:  Klaus Böheim; Robert Mlynski; Thomas Lenarz; Max Schlögel; Rudolf Hagen
Journal:  Acta Otolaryngol       Date:  2012-07-10       Impact factor: 1.494

3.  Pros and Cons of Round Window Vibroplasty in Open Cavities: Audiological, Surgical, and Quality of Life Outcomes.

Authors:  Luis Lassaletta; Miryam Calvino; Isabel Sánchez-Cuadrado; Rosa M Pérez-Mora; Elena Muñoz; Javier Gavilán
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 2.311

4.  Cone beam computed tomography after round window vibroplasty: do the radiological findings match the auditory outcome?

Authors:  Maurizio Barbara; Luigi Volpini; Mario Ciotti; Chiara Filippi; Edoardo Covelli; Simonetta Monini; Ferdinando D'Ambrosio
Journal:  Acta Otolaryngol       Date:  2015-03-06       Impact factor: 1.494

5.  The mechanism of direct stimulation of the cochlea by vibrating the round window.

Authors:  Ronen Perez; Cahtia Adelman; Shai Chordekar; Marrigje A de Jong; Haim Sohmer
Journal:  J Basic Clin Physiol Pharmacol       Date:  2014-09

6.  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

7.  Indications and outcome of subtotal petrosectomy for active middle ear implants.

Authors:  Nicolas Verhaert; Hamidreza Mojallal; Burkard Schwab
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2012-07-25       Impact factor: 2.503

8.  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

9.  Active middle ear implants in patients undergoing subtotal petrosectomy: new application for the Vibrant Soundbridge device and its implication for lateral cranium base surgery.

Authors:  Thomas Linder; Christoph Schlegel; Nicola DeMin; Stephan van der Westhuizen
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 2.311

10.  Active Middle Ear Implantation: Long-term Medical and Technical Follow-up, Implant Survival, and Complications.

Authors:  Joost W Zwartenkot; Jef J S Mulder; Ad F M Snik; Cor W R J Cremers; Emmanuel A M Mylanus
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 2.311

View more
  3 in total

1.  Successive ipsilateral surgery of Vibrant Soundbridge and Bonebridge devices for congenital bilateral conductive hearing loss: a case report.

Authors:  Yujie Liu; Ran Ren; Shouqin Zhao
Journal:  J Int Med Res       Date:  2020-12       Impact factor: 1.671

2.  Active Middle Ear Implant in a Patient with Neurofibromatosis Type 1 and Multiple Calvarial Defects: A Case Report.

Authors:  Kei Kajihara; Akira Ganaha; Keiji Matsuda; Takeshi Nakamura; Tetsuya Tono
Journal:  J Int Adv Otol       Date:  2022-03       Impact factor: 1.316

3.  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

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.