Cargando…

Long‐Term Outcome of Hearing Rehabilitation With An Active Middle Ear Implant

OBJECTIVE: To assess the audiological and long‐term medical and technical follow‐up outcomes of an active middle ear implant. METHODS: This was a retrospective medical chart analysis of all patients provided with an active middle ear implant in a tertiary academic medical referral center between Sep...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Brkic, Faris F., Riss, Dominik, Auinger, Alice, Zoerner, Barbara, Arnoldner, Christoph, Baumgartner, Wolf‐Dieter, Gstoettner, Wolfgang, Vyskocil, Erich
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6585801/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30284273
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/lary.27513
_version_ 1783428777151299584
author Brkic, Faris F.
Riss, Dominik
Auinger, Alice
Zoerner, Barbara
Arnoldner, Christoph
Baumgartner, Wolf‐Dieter
Gstoettner, Wolfgang
Vyskocil, Erich
author_facet Brkic, Faris F.
Riss, Dominik
Auinger, Alice
Zoerner, Barbara
Arnoldner, Christoph
Baumgartner, Wolf‐Dieter
Gstoettner, Wolfgang
Vyskocil, Erich
author_sort Brkic, Faris F.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To assess the audiological and long‐term medical and technical follow‐up outcomes of an active middle ear implant. METHODS: This was a retrospective medical chart analysis of all patients provided with an active middle ear implant in a tertiary academic medical referral center between September 1, 1998, and July 31, 2015. Main outcome measures were medical and technical complications, revisions, reimplantations, explantations, coupling approaches, mean time of use, pre‐ and postoperative hearing thresholds, functional hearing gain across frequencies (250–4,000 Hz), and Freiburg monosyllablic word test at 65 dB. RESULTS: One hundred and three patients were identified. Fifteen were implanted bilaterally (n = 118 Vibrant Soundbridge devices [MED‐EL, Innsbruck, Austria]). Seventy‐seven devices were implanted for sensorineural and 41 for mixed and conductive hearing loss. Patients used the implant for 6.7 years (range 0.7 months–17.9 years) on average. Ninety‐one patients (77.12%) were using the device at the end of the observation period. An overall complication rate of 16.1% was observed. The revision and explantation rates were higher for devices implanted between 2004 and 2006. The device failure rate was 3.4%. Audiological evaluation showed significant hearing gains for both hearing loss patient groups. CONCLUSION: This long‐term follow‐up reveals the reliability of the active middle ear implant in a single center. Overall complication rate and device failure rate are acceptable. The complication rate was higher during implementation of alternative coupling approaches. The audiological benefit was satisfactory in patients with all hearing loss types. The majority of implanted patients used the implant at the end of the observation period. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 129:477–481, 2019
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6585801
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65858012019-06-27 Long‐Term Outcome of Hearing Rehabilitation With An Active Middle Ear Implant Brkic, Faris F. Riss, Dominik Auinger, Alice Zoerner, Barbara Arnoldner, Christoph Baumgartner, Wolf‐Dieter Gstoettner, Wolfgang Vyskocil, Erich Laryngoscope Otology/Neurotology OBJECTIVE: To assess the audiological and long‐term medical and technical follow‐up outcomes of an active middle ear implant. METHODS: This was a retrospective medical chart analysis of all patients provided with an active middle ear implant in a tertiary academic medical referral center between September 1, 1998, and July 31, 2015. Main outcome measures were medical and technical complications, revisions, reimplantations, explantations, coupling approaches, mean time of use, pre‐ and postoperative hearing thresholds, functional hearing gain across frequencies (250–4,000 Hz), and Freiburg monosyllablic word test at 65 dB. RESULTS: One hundred and three patients were identified. Fifteen were implanted bilaterally (n = 118 Vibrant Soundbridge devices [MED‐EL, Innsbruck, Austria]). Seventy‐seven devices were implanted for sensorineural and 41 for mixed and conductive hearing loss. Patients used the implant for 6.7 years (range 0.7 months–17.9 years) on average. Ninety‐one patients (77.12%) were using the device at the end of the observation period. An overall complication rate of 16.1% was observed. The revision and explantation rates were higher for devices implanted between 2004 and 2006. The device failure rate was 3.4%. Audiological evaluation showed significant hearing gains for both hearing loss patient groups. CONCLUSION: This long‐term follow‐up reveals the reliability of the active middle ear implant in a single center. Overall complication rate and device failure rate are acceptable. The complication rate was higher during implementation of alternative coupling approaches. The audiological benefit was satisfactory in patients with all hearing loss types. The majority of implanted patients used the implant at the end of the observation period. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 129:477–481, 2019 John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2018-10-04 2019-02 /pmc/articles/PMC6585801/ /pubmed/30284273 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/lary.27513 Text en © 2018 The Authors. The Laryngoscope published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Otology/Neurotology
Brkic, Faris F.
Riss, Dominik
Auinger, Alice
Zoerner, Barbara
Arnoldner, Christoph
Baumgartner, Wolf‐Dieter
Gstoettner, Wolfgang
Vyskocil, Erich
Long‐Term Outcome of Hearing Rehabilitation With An Active Middle Ear Implant
title Long‐Term Outcome of Hearing Rehabilitation With An Active Middle Ear Implant
title_full Long‐Term Outcome of Hearing Rehabilitation With An Active Middle Ear Implant
title_fullStr Long‐Term Outcome of Hearing Rehabilitation With An Active Middle Ear Implant
title_full_unstemmed Long‐Term Outcome of Hearing Rehabilitation With An Active Middle Ear Implant
title_short Long‐Term Outcome of Hearing Rehabilitation With An Active Middle Ear Implant
title_sort long‐term outcome of hearing rehabilitation with an active middle ear implant
topic Otology/Neurotology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6585801/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30284273
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/lary.27513
work_keys_str_mv AT brkicfarisf longtermoutcomeofhearingrehabilitationwithanactivemiddleearimplant
AT rissdominik longtermoutcomeofhearingrehabilitationwithanactivemiddleearimplant
AT auingeralice longtermoutcomeofhearingrehabilitationwithanactivemiddleearimplant
AT zoernerbarbara longtermoutcomeofhearingrehabilitationwithanactivemiddleearimplant
AT arnoldnerchristoph longtermoutcomeofhearingrehabilitationwithanactivemiddleearimplant
AT baumgartnerwolfdieter longtermoutcomeofhearingrehabilitationwithanactivemiddleearimplant
AT gstoettnerwolfgang longtermoutcomeofhearingrehabilitationwithanactivemiddleearimplant
AT vyskocilerich longtermoutcomeofhearingrehabilitationwithanactivemiddleearimplant