Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2022; 26(04): e649-e656
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1742765
Original Research

Bone-Anchored Hearing Implants: Surgical and Audiological Comparison of Different Surgical Techniques

Merve Torun Topcu 
1   Department of Audiology, Istanbul Medeniyet University, School of Health Sciences, Istanbul, Turkey
,
Basak Mutlu 
1   Department of Audiology, Istanbul Medeniyet University, School of Health Sciences, Istanbul, Turkey
,
Serdal Celik 
2   Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Istanbul Medeniyet University School of Medicine, Goztepe Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
,
Bahtiyar Celikgun 
3   Marmara University, Health Sciences Institutes, Audiology Program, Istanbul, Turkey
,
Ahmet Mutlu 
2   Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Istanbul Medeniyet University School of Medicine, Goztepe Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
,
M. Tayyar Kalcioglu 
2   Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Istanbul Medeniyet University School of Medicine, Goztepe Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Introduction The bone-anchored hearing implant system (BAHS) is an effective amplification system that transmits the sounds received by an external operating system to the inner ear by bypassing the middle ear placed in the temporal bone.

Objective This study compares the results of patients who underwent bone-anchored hearing implant system (BAHS) surgery using two different surgical methods in terms of preoperative and postoperative complications, surgical time, audiological findings, and patient satisfaction.

Methods The results of 22 patients who underwent BAHS were evaluated retrospectively from video records and audiological results, The Turkish Version of the Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) questionnaire were evaluated. Two different surgical approaches were used for implantation: the linear incision technique (n = 9) and the punch technique (n = 13).

Results Mean surgical durations were 9.67 ± 2.85 and 47.65 ± 6.13 minutes for Groups A and B, respectively, and these were significantly different (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences between the groups' speech recognition scores for a signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of +5 (p = 0.173), SNR of 0 (p = 0.315), or SNR of -5 (p = 0.360) and results of the GBI scores.

Conclusion The punch technique has a significant advantage due to a shorter surgery duration without increased surgical complications. Additionally, the punch technique showed no significant difference in hearing performance or satisfaction compared with linear incision.

Keywords

bone-anchored implants - quality of life - hearing tests - punch technique - linear incision technique


Publication History

Received: 27 May 2021

Accepted: 02 December 2021

Article published online:
02 March 2022

© 2022. Fundação Otorrinolaringologia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil

 

  • References

  • 1 Tjellström A, Lindström J, Hallén O, Albrektsson T, Brånemark PI. Osseointegrated titanium implants in the temporal bone. A clinical study on bone-anchored hearing aids. Am J Otol 1981; 2 (04) 304-310
    Google Scholar
  • 2 de Wolf MJ, Hendrix S, Cremers CW, Snik AF. Better performance with bone-anchored hearing aid than acoustic devices in patients with severe air-bone gap. Laryngoscope 2011; 121 (03) 613-616 DOI: 10.1002/lary.21167.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Kompis M, Wimmer W, Caversaccio M. Long term benefit of bone anchored hearing systems in single sided deafness. Acta Otolaryngol 2017; 137 (04) 398-402 DOI: 10.1080/00016489.2016.1261410.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Tjellström A, Granström G. One-stage procedure to establish osseointegration: a zero to five years follow-up report. J Laryngol Otol 1995; 109 (07) 593-598 DOI: 10.1017/s0022215100130816.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Tjellström A. Osseointegrated implants for replacement of absent or defective ears. Clin Plast Surg 1990; 17 (02) 355-366
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Tjellström A, Granström G. How we do it: Frequency of skin necrosis after BAHA surgery. Clin Otolaryngol 2006; 31 (03) 216-220 DOI: 10.1111/j.1749-4486.2006.01152.x.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Hultcrantz M. Outcome of the bone-anchored hearing aid procedure without skin thinning: a prospective clinical trial. Otol Neurotol 2011; 32 (07) 1134-1139 DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0b013e31822a1c47.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Goldman RA, Georgolios A, Shaia WT. The punch method for bone-anchored hearing aid placement. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2013; 148 (05) 878-880 DOI: 10.1177/0194599813476666.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Bonilla A, Magri C, Juan E. Findings from the experience with the punch technique for auditory osseointegrated implants: A retrospective single center comparative study. Acta Otorrinolaringol Esp (Engl Ed) 2017; 68 (06) 309-316 DOI: 10.1016/j.otorri.2017.01.005.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 DI Giustino F, Vannucchi P, Pecci R, Mengucci A, Santimone R, Giannoni B. Bone-anchored hearing implant surgery: our experience with linear incision and punch techniques. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital 2018; 38 (03) 257-263 DOI: 10.14639/0392-100X-1694.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Dumon T, Medina M, Sperling NM. Punch and Drill: Implantation of Bone Anchored Hearing Device Through a Minimal Skin Punch Incision Versus Implantation With Dermatome and Soft Tissue Reduction. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2016; 125 (03) 199-206 DOI: 10.1177/0003489415606447.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Durankaya SM, Şerbetcioglu M, Dalkılıç G, Gurkan S, Kırkım G. Development of a Turkish monosyllabic word recognition test for adults. J Int Adv Otol 2014; 10: 172-180
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Kara K, Tarkan Ö. Evaluation of Hearing Results and Quality of Life in Patients with Implanted Bone-Anchored Hearing Devices Master Thesis, Cukurova University Faculty of Medicine, Adana. 2014
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Dillon H. Hearing Aids. Sydney,. Australia: Boomerang Press; 2001
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Caruso A, Giannuzzi AL, Sozzi V, Sanna M. Bone anchored hearing implants without skin thinning: the Gruppo Otologico surgical and audiological experience. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2017; 274 (02) 695-700 DOI: 10.1007/s00405-016-4305-x.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Alshehri H, Alsanosi A, Majdalawieh O. Modified Baha Punch Technique: Least Invasive, Shortest Time and No Suturing. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2016; 68 (01) 80-86 DOI: 10.1007/s12070-015-0929-1 6.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Holgers KM, Tjellström A, Bjursten LM, Erlandsson BE. Soft tissue reactions around percutaneous implants: a clinical study of soft tissue conditions around skin-penetrating titanium implants for bone-anchored hearing aids. Am J Otol 1988; 9 (01) 56-59
    Google Scholar
  • 18 van der Stee EHH, Strijbos RM, Bom SJH, Hol MKS. Percutaneous bone-anchored hearing implant surgery: linear incision technique with tissue preservation versus linear incision technique with tissue reduction. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2018; 275 (07) 1737-1747 DOI: 10.1007/s00405-018-5005-5.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Ozmen ÖA, Basut O. Early Experiences with Bone Anchored Hearing Aid in Uludag University. Journal of Uludağ University Medical Faculty 2010; 36: 111-115
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Pekkarinen E, Salmivalli A, Suonpää J.. Effect of noise on word discrimination by subjects with impaired hearing, compared with those with normal hearing. Scand Audiol 1990; 19 (01) 31-36 DOI: 10.3109/01050399009070749.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Bayat A, Farhadi M, Emamdjomeh H, Saki N, Mirmomeni G, Rahim F. Effect of conductive hearing loss on central auditory function. Rev Bras Otorrinolaringol (Engl Ed) 2017; 83 (02) 137-141 DOI: 10.1016/j.bjorl.2016.02.010.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Moore B. An Introduction to the Psychology of Hearing. London: GB Academic Press; 2003
    Google Scholar
  • 23 Moller AR. Hearing: Anatomy, Physiology, and Disorders of the Auditory System. San Diego: USA Plural Publishing Inc; 2013
    Google Scholar
  • 24 Gürses E, Türkyılmaz MD, Sennaroğlu G. Evaluation of auditory temporal processing in patients fitted with bone-anchored hearing aids. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2020; 277 (02) 351-359 DOI: 10.1007/s00405-019-05701-4.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Arunachalam PS, Kilby D, Meikle D, Davison T, Johnson IJ. Bone-anchored hearing aid quality of life assessed by Glasgow Benefit Inventory. Laryngoscope 2001; 111 (07) 1260-1263 DOI: 10.1097/00005537-200107000-00022.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 McLarnon CM, Davison T, Johnson IJ. Bone-anchored hearing aid: comparison of benefit by patient subgroups. Laryngoscope 2004; 114 (05) 942-944
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Lekue A, Lassaletta L, Sánchez-Camón I, Pérez-Mora R, Gavilán J. Calidad de vida de pacientes implantados con el dispositivo BAHA según su indicación [Quality of life in patients implanted with the BAHA device depending on the aetiology]. Acta Otorrinolaringol Esp. 2013; 64 (01) 17-21 DOI: 10.1016/j.otorri.2012.06.006.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Oeding K, Valente M. The effectiveness of the directional microphone in the Oticon Medical Ponto Pro in participants with unilateral sensorineural hearing loss. J Am Acad Audiol 2013; 24 (08) 701-713 DOI: 10.3766/jaaa.24.8.7.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar