Nina Wardenga1,2, Victoria Diedrich3, Bernd Waldmann4, Thomas Lenarz5,3, Hannes Maier5,3. 1. Cluster of Excellence Hearing4all, Hannover, Germany, wardenga.nina@mh-hannover.de. 2. Department of Otolaryngology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany, wardenga.nina@mh-hannover.de. 3. Department of Otolaryngology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany. 4. Cochlear Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG, Hannover, Germany. 5. Cluster of Excellence Hearing4all, Hannover, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the present study was to determine the fraction of patients with mixed hearing loss who can or cannot expect benefit from power hearing aids (HAs) after stapes surgery. DESIGN: The audiological outcome of 374 stapes surgeries was used to calculate the patients' individual postoperative requirements in terms of gain and output of HAs. These requirements were compared to the available gain and output provided by state-of-the-art power HAs at 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, and 4.0 kHz. According to these comparisons, ears were divided into three groups. For G0, required gain and output lay within the corresponding technical limits of the HAs at all frequencies. In G1, one or both requirements could not be fulfilled at 1 frequency. G2 combined all ears where the requirements lay beyond the HA's technical limitations at 2 or more frequencies. RESULTS: Stapes surgery resulted in an improvement of air-bone gap (ABG) in 84.5% of the cases by 15.7 dB on average. Based on pure-tone average (0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 4.0 kHz), 40.6% of all cases showed an ABG ≤10 dB. 44.9% of all cases did no longer need a HA after stapes surgery. A power HA would fulfill both audiological criteria at all 4 frequencies in 81.6% of cases that needed a HA postoperatively. However, 18.4% would not be sufficiently treatable at 1 or more frequencies (15.0% in G1, 3.4% in G2). CONCLUSIONS: The present study identified a subset of patients with mixed hearing loss after stapes surgery that cannot be treated sufficiently with available power HAs. As the residual ABG is an important reason for this lack of treatment success, the advancement of alternative hearing devices that circumvent the middle ear, such as powerful active middle ear implants, is indicated. The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the present study was to determine the fraction of patients with mixed hearing loss who can or cannot expect benefit from power hearing aids (HAs) after stapes surgery. DESIGN: The audiological outcome of 374 stapes surgeries was used to calculate the patients' individual postoperative requirements in terms of gain and output of HAs. These requirements were compared to the available gain and output provided by state-of-the-art power HAs at 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, and 4.0 kHz. According to these comparisons, ears were divided into three groups. For G0, required gain and output lay within the corresponding technical limits of the HAs at all frequencies. In G1, one or both requirements could not be fulfilled at 1 frequency. G2 combined all ears where the requirements lay beyond the HA's technical limitations at 2 or more frequencies. RESULTS: Stapes surgery resulted in an improvement of air-bone gap (ABG) in 84.5% of the cases by 15.7 dB on average. Based on pure-tone average (0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 4.0 kHz), 40.6% of all cases showed an ABG ≤10 dB. 44.9% of all cases did no longer need a HA after stapes surgery. A power HA would fulfill both audiological criteria at all 4 frequencies in 81.6% of cases that needed a HA postoperatively. However, 18.4% would not be sufficiently treatable at 1 or more frequencies (15.0% in G1, 3.4% in G2). CONCLUSIONS: The present study identified a subset of patients with mixed hearing loss after stapes surgery that cannot be treated sufficiently with available power HAs. As the residual ABG is an important reason for this lack of treatment success, the advancement of alternative hearing devices that circumvent the middle ear, such as powerful active middle ear implants, is indicated. The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.
Entities:
Keywords:
Air-bone gap; Gain; Hearing aid usability; Mixed hearing loss; Output; Stapes surgery
Authors: Paul Merkus; Maarten C van Loon; Conrad F Smit; Cas Smits; Adrianus F C de Cock; Erik F Hensen Journal: Laryngoscope Date: 2011-08-16 Impact factor: 3.325
Authors: Nina Wardenga; Ad F M Snik; Eugen Kludt; Bernd Waldmann; Thomas Lenarz; Hannes Maier Journal: Audiol Neurootol Date: 2020-01-31 Impact factor: 1.854