Cargando…

Surgical and audiological results of bone-anchored hearing aids: comparison of two surgical techniques

INTRODUCTION: The bone-anchored hearing system has become the most viable treatment option for subjects with conductive or mixed hearing loss, who are unable to benefit from conventional hearing aids or middle ear surgery. OBJECTIVE: To compare the surgical and audiological outcomes between the mini...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Amaral, Maria Stella Arantes do, Santos, Francine Raquel dos, Danieli, Fabiana, Massuda, Eduardo T., Reis, Ana Cláudia Mirândola Barbosa, Hyppolito, Miguel Angelo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9422553/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32888895
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bjorl.2020.07.003
_version_ 1784777839488270336
author Amaral, Maria Stella Arantes do
Santos, Francine Raquel dos
Danieli, Fabiana
Massuda, Eduardo T.
Reis, Ana Cláudia Mirândola Barbosa
Hyppolito, Miguel Angelo
author_facet Amaral, Maria Stella Arantes do
Santos, Francine Raquel dos
Danieli, Fabiana
Massuda, Eduardo T.
Reis, Ana Cláudia Mirândola Barbosa
Hyppolito, Miguel Angelo
author_sort Amaral, Maria Stella Arantes do
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: The bone-anchored hearing system has become the most viable treatment option for subjects with conductive or mixed hearing loss, who are unable to benefit from conventional hearing aids or middle ear surgery. OBJECTIVE: To compare the surgical and audiological outcomes between the minimally-invasive Ponto surgery and a linear incision with soft tissue preservation techniques in bone-anchored hearing system recipients. METHODS: A retrospective study was carried out from January 2017 to June 2018. Forty-two adult patients eligible for unilateral bone-anchored hearing system surgery with the Ponto system were included in the study. The implant and abutment lengths used varied from 3 to 4 mm and from 6 to 14 mm, according to the bone and skin thickness of the participants, respectively. RESULTS: Twenty-two surgeries were performed using the minimally invasive Ponto surgery technique (52.4%) and 20 (47.6%) using the linear incision. The mean age of the subjects implanted with minimally invasive Ponto surgery and linear incision techniques were 42.0 and 33.3 years old, respectively. Ten male (45,5%) and 14 (70%) female patients were implanted using minimally invasive Ponto surgery and the linear incision techniques, respectively. There were no differences between pure tone audiometric thresholds and monosyllabic word recognition scores of the subjects, when comparing both surgical techniques. The minimally invasive Ponto surgery technique significantly reduced the surgical time compared to the linear incision technique. There were no differences between both surgical techniques for skin-related complications; (Holgers 3 and 4) which occurred in 18.8% for MIPS and in 25% for linear incision. Subjects included in the minimally invasive Ponto surgery technique group showed a superior cosmetic outcome, with no surgical scar or additional sutures. CONCLUSION: The surgical and audiological outcomes were satisfactory and were not correlated to the surgical technique selected in all subjects. When compared to the linear incision, the minimally invasive Ponto surgery technique showed reduced surgical time and superior esthetic outcomes in the postoperative follow-up.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9422553
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94225532022-08-31 Surgical and audiological results of bone-anchored hearing aids: comparison of two surgical techniques Amaral, Maria Stella Arantes do Santos, Francine Raquel dos Danieli, Fabiana Massuda, Eduardo T. Reis, Ana Cláudia Mirândola Barbosa Hyppolito, Miguel Angelo Braz J Otorhinolaryngol Original Article INTRODUCTION: The bone-anchored hearing system has become the most viable treatment option for subjects with conductive or mixed hearing loss, who are unable to benefit from conventional hearing aids or middle ear surgery. OBJECTIVE: To compare the surgical and audiological outcomes between the minimally-invasive Ponto surgery and a linear incision with soft tissue preservation techniques in bone-anchored hearing system recipients. METHODS: A retrospective study was carried out from January 2017 to June 2018. Forty-two adult patients eligible for unilateral bone-anchored hearing system surgery with the Ponto system were included in the study. The implant and abutment lengths used varied from 3 to 4 mm and from 6 to 14 mm, according to the bone and skin thickness of the participants, respectively. RESULTS: Twenty-two surgeries were performed using the minimally invasive Ponto surgery technique (52.4%) and 20 (47.6%) using the linear incision. The mean age of the subjects implanted with minimally invasive Ponto surgery and linear incision techniques were 42.0 and 33.3 years old, respectively. Ten male (45,5%) and 14 (70%) female patients were implanted using minimally invasive Ponto surgery and the linear incision techniques, respectively. There were no differences between pure tone audiometric thresholds and monosyllabic word recognition scores of the subjects, when comparing both surgical techniques. The minimally invasive Ponto surgery technique significantly reduced the surgical time compared to the linear incision technique. There were no differences between both surgical techniques for skin-related complications; (Holgers 3 and 4) which occurred in 18.8% for MIPS and in 25% for linear incision. Subjects included in the minimally invasive Ponto surgery technique group showed a superior cosmetic outcome, with no surgical scar or additional sutures. CONCLUSION: The surgical and audiological outcomes were satisfactory and were not correlated to the surgical technique selected in all subjects. When compared to the linear incision, the minimally invasive Ponto surgery technique showed reduced surgical time and superior esthetic outcomes in the postoperative follow-up. Elsevier 2020-08-19 /pmc/articles/PMC9422553/ /pubmed/32888895 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bjorl.2020.07.003 Text en © 2020 Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial. Published by Elsevier Editora Ltda. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Article
Amaral, Maria Stella Arantes do
Santos, Francine Raquel dos
Danieli, Fabiana
Massuda, Eduardo T.
Reis, Ana Cláudia Mirândola Barbosa
Hyppolito, Miguel Angelo
Surgical and audiological results of bone-anchored hearing aids: comparison of two surgical techniques
title Surgical and audiological results of bone-anchored hearing aids: comparison of two surgical techniques
title_full Surgical and audiological results of bone-anchored hearing aids: comparison of two surgical techniques
title_fullStr Surgical and audiological results of bone-anchored hearing aids: comparison of two surgical techniques
title_full_unstemmed Surgical and audiological results of bone-anchored hearing aids: comparison of two surgical techniques
title_short Surgical and audiological results of bone-anchored hearing aids: comparison of two surgical techniques
title_sort surgical and audiological results of bone-anchored hearing aids: comparison of two surgical techniques
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9422553/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32888895
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bjorl.2020.07.003
work_keys_str_mv AT amaralmariastellaarantesdo surgicalandaudiologicalresultsofboneanchoredhearingaidscomparisonoftwosurgicaltechniques
AT santosfrancineraqueldos surgicalandaudiologicalresultsofboneanchoredhearingaidscomparisonoftwosurgicaltechniques
AT danielifabiana surgicalandaudiologicalresultsofboneanchoredhearingaidscomparisonoftwosurgicaltechniques
AT massudaeduardot surgicalandaudiologicalresultsofboneanchoredhearingaidscomparisonoftwosurgicaltechniques
AT reisanaclaudiamirandolabarbosa surgicalandaudiologicalresultsofboneanchoredhearingaidscomparisonoftwosurgicaltechniques
AT hyppolitomiguelangelo surgicalandaudiologicalresultsofboneanchoredhearingaidscomparisonoftwosurgicaltechniques