Cargando…
Three-Year Clinical and Audiological Outcomes of Percutaneous Implants for Bone Conduction Devices: Comparison Between Tissue Preservation Technique and Tissue Reduction Technique
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the three-year clinical and audiological outcomes of soft-tissue preservation compared to soft-tissue reduction in linear incision surgery for percutaneous implant for bone conduction (BC) devices. METHODS: Twenty-five patients (25 implants) were enrolled in a prospective coh...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6380444/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30742596 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000002105 |
_version_ | 1783396302104559616 |
---|---|
author | Kruyt, Ivo J. Kok, Herman Bosman, Arjan Nelissen, Rik Chrétien Mylanus, Emmanuel Antonia Maria Hol, Myrthe Karianne Sofie |
author_facet | Kruyt, Ivo J. Kok, Herman Bosman, Arjan Nelissen, Rik Chrétien Mylanus, Emmanuel Antonia Maria Hol, Myrthe Karianne Sofie |
author_sort | Kruyt, Ivo J. |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the three-year clinical and audiological outcomes of soft-tissue preservation compared to soft-tissue reduction in linear incision surgery for percutaneous implant for bone conduction (BC) devices. METHODS: Twenty-five patients (25 implants) were enrolled in a prospective cohort for implant surgery with linear incision and tissue preservation. The control group consisted of 25 patients (25 implants) from a previous randomized controlled trial in which a linear incision with soft-tissue reduction was applied. Follow-up visits were scheduled at 7 and 21 days (fitting of sound processor); 12 weeks; 6 months; and at 1, 2, and 3 years after implantation. Main outcome measures were skin sensibility, soft-tissue status, Implant Stability Quotient (ISQ), skin height, implant survival, revision surgery, scar assessment, and hearing thresholds (BC in-situ between 250 Hz and 8 kHz with BC device on testband and abutment, and BC thresholds at 250Hz–4 kHz with a B71 bone conductor). RESULTS: Tissue preservation resulted in superior sensibility (mean percentage correct responses 99.7% [SD 1.7] vs 92.0% [SD 9.2], p = 0.0001). No spontaneous implant loss occurred in either group. The abutment was removed in two tests and in one control patient. Two control patients needed skin revision surgery. Although not statistically significant, more adverse soft-tissue reactions (Holgers ≥2) were observed in the test-group (n = 9 [36%] vs n = 3 [12%], p = 0.095). ISQ increased significantly more in the test group compared to the control group (7.64 [SD 4.05] vs 4.29 [SD 3.93]). Skin thickening, scar assessment, and hearing outcomes were comparable. CONCLUSION: Tissue preservation demonstrated superior skin sensibility compared to tissue reduction while other clinical outcomes were comparably excellent. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6380444 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-63804442019-03-12 Three-Year Clinical and Audiological Outcomes of Percutaneous Implants for Bone Conduction Devices: Comparison Between Tissue Preservation Technique and Tissue Reduction Technique Kruyt, Ivo J. Kok, Herman Bosman, Arjan Nelissen, Rik Chrétien Mylanus, Emmanuel Antonia Maria Hol, Myrthe Karianne Sofie Otol Neurotol Middle Ear and Mastoid Disease OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the three-year clinical and audiological outcomes of soft-tissue preservation compared to soft-tissue reduction in linear incision surgery for percutaneous implant for bone conduction (BC) devices. METHODS: Twenty-five patients (25 implants) were enrolled in a prospective cohort for implant surgery with linear incision and tissue preservation. The control group consisted of 25 patients (25 implants) from a previous randomized controlled trial in which a linear incision with soft-tissue reduction was applied. Follow-up visits were scheduled at 7 and 21 days (fitting of sound processor); 12 weeks; 6 months; and at 1, 2, and 3 years after implantation. Main outcome measures were skin sensibility, soft-tissue status, Implant Stability Quotient (ISQ), skin height, implant survival, revision surgery, scar assessment, and hearing thresholds (BC in-situ between 250 Hz and 8 kHz with BC device on testband and abutment, and BC thresholds at 250Hz–4 kHz with a B71 bone conductor). RESULTS: Tissue preservation resulted in superior sensibility (mean percentage correct responses 99.7% [SD 1.7] vs 92.0% [SD 9.2], p = 0.0001). No spontaneous implant loss occurred in either group. The abutment was removed in two tests and in one control patient. Two control patients needed skin revision surgery. Although not statistically significant, more adverse soft-tissue reactions (Holgers ≥2) were observed in the test-group (n = 9 [36%] vs n = 3 [12%], p = 0.095). ISQ increased significantly more in the test group compared to the control group (7.64 [SD 4.05] vs 4.29 [SD 3.93]). Skin thickening, scar assessment, and hearing outcomes were comparable. CONCLUSION: Tissue preservation demonstrated superior skin sensibility compared to tissue reduction while other clinical outcomes were comparably excellent. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2019-03 2019-01-25 /pmc/articles/PMC6380444/ /pubmed/30742596 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000002105 Text en Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of Otology & Neurotology, Inc. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 |
spellingShingle | Middle Ear and Mastoid Disease Kruyt, Ivo J. Kok, Herman Bosman, Arjan Nelissen, Rik Chrétien Mylanus, Emmanuel Antonia Maria Hol, Myrthe Karianne Sofie Three-Year Clinical and Audiological Outcomes of Percutaneous Implants for Bone Conduction Devices: Comparison Between Tissue Preservation Technique and Tissue Reduction Technique |
title | Three-Year Clinical and Audiological Outcomes of Percutaneous Implants for Bone Conduction Devices: Comparison Between Tissue Preservation Technique and Tissue Reduction Technique |
title_full | Three-Year Clinical and Audiological Outcomes of Percutaneous Implants for Bone Conduction Devices: Comparison Between Tissue Preservation Technique and Tissue Reduction Technique |
title_fullStr | Three-Year Clinical and Audiological Outcomes of Percutaneous Implants for Bone Conduction Devices: Comparison Between Tissue Preservation Technique and Tissue Reduction Technique |
title_full_unstemmed | Three-Year Clinical and Audiological Outcomes of Percutaneous Implants for Bone Conduction Devices: Comparison Between Tissue Preservation Technique and Tissue Reduction Technique |
title_short | Three-Year Clinical and Audiological Outcomes of Percutaneous Implants for Bone Conduction Devices: Comparison Between Tissue Preservation Technique and Tissue Reduction Technique |
title_sort | three-year clinical and audiological outcomes of percutaneous implants for bone conduction devices: comparison between tissue preservation technique and tissue reduction technique |
topic | Middle Ear and Mastoid Disease |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6380444/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30742596 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000002105 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kruytivoj threeyearclinicalandaudiologicaloutcomesofpercutaneousimplantsforboneconductiondevicescomparisonbetweentissuepreservationtechniqueandtissuereductiontechnique AT kokherman threeyearclinicalandaudiologicaloutcomesofpercutaneousimplantsforboneconductiondevicescomparisonbetweentissuepreservationtechniqueandtissuereductiontechnique AT bosmanarjan threeyearclinicalandaudiologicaloutcomesofpercutaneousimplantsforboneconductiondevicescomparisonbetweentissuepreservationtechniqueandtissuereductiontechnique AT nelissenrikchretien threeyearclinicalandaudiologicaloutcomesofpercutaneousimplantsforboneconductiondevicescomparisonbetweentissuepreservationtechniqueandtissuereductiontechnique AT mylanusemmanuelantoniamaria threeyearclinicalandaudiologicaloutcomesofpercutaneousimplantsforboneconductiondevicescomparisonbetweentissuepreservationtechniqueandtissuereductiontechnique AT holmyrthekariannesofie threeyearclinicalandaudiologicaloutcomesofpercutaneousimplantsforboneconductiondevicescomparisonbetweentissuepreservationtechniqueandtissuereductiontechnique |