Bone Conduction Implants: Comparative of Audiometric Results and Quality of Life Bonebridge® vs Osia®.

INTRODUCTION: Bone conduction implants have been indicated for patients with conductive hearing loss, mixed hearing loss, and even profound unilateral sensorineural hearing loss. With the introduction of Bonebridge®, new transcutaneous implant options emerged. The latest is Osia®, a direct-drive variant or active systems where the implant directly generates and applies vibration to the bone. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective study of two cohorts of patients treated with active bone conduction implants at a single center, one with the Bonebridge® device and the other with Osia®. OUTCOMES: Fourteen patients were included, seven in each group (n=14). The Bonebridge® group showed an average hearing gain in tonal intelligibility thresholds of 32.43±21.39 dB and a gain in the average intelligibility threshold (with 50% discrimination) of 26.29±19.10 dB. In the Osia® group, there was a gain in average tonal thresholds of 41.49±14.16 dB and 23.72±6.98 dB in average intelligibility thresholds. Both devices contributed to improvements in patients' quality of life, as assessed with APHAB in all the variables studied in the test. Both devices offer rehabilitation for hearing loss as an alternative to hearing aids. The Osia® system shows statistically significant(p<0.05) improvements in mid and high frequencies, but Bonebridge® slightly outperforms in speech understanding at 50%. Differences in average tonal thresholds and quality of life are not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: While auditory improvement is observed post-implantation, other aspects, such as intelligibility thresholds and quality of life, lack statistical significance. Given the limited experience with Osia® and the small sample size, the choice of the device should be personalized. Although the literature is inconsistent due to small sample sizes and variable approaches, some studies suggest potential advantages of the Osia® system, especially in speech comprehension in different environments and greater hearing gain compared to Bonebridge®.

The Listening Network and Cochlear Implant Benefits in Hearing-Impaired Adults.

Older adults with mild or no hearing loss make more errors and expend more effort listening to speech. Cochlear implants (CI) restore hearing to deaf patients but with limited fidelity. We hypothesized that patient-reported hearing and health-related quality of life in CI patients may similarly vary according to age. Speech Spatial Qualities (SSQ) of hearing scale and Health Utilities Index Mark III (HUI) questionnaires were administered to 543 unilaterally implanted adults across Europe, South Africa, and South America. Data were acquired before surgery and at 1, 2, and 3 years post-surgery. Data were analyzed using linear mixed models with visit, age group (18-34, 35-44, 45-54, 55-64, and 65+), and side of implant as main factors and adjusted for other covariates. Tinnitus and dizziness prevalence did not vary with age, but older groups had more preoperative hearing. Preoperatively and postoperatively, SSQ scores were significantly higher (Δ0.75-0.82) for those aged <45 compared with those 55+. However, gains in SSQ scores were equivalent across age groups, although postoperative SSQ scores were higher in right-ear implanted subjects. All age groups benefited equally in terms of HUI gain (0.18), with no decrease in scores with age. Overall, younger adults appeared to cope better with a degraded hearing before and after CI, leading to better subjective hearing performance.

Guía clínica sobre implantes de conducción de vía ósea / Clinical guideline on bone conduction implants

Introducción y objetivos: En la última década se han producido numerosos y relevantes avances en el tratamiento de la hipoacusia transmisiva y mixta que han desembocado en una ampliación de las indicaciones de los implantes de conducción de vía ósea y la aparición de nuevos dispositivos. La Comisión Científica de Audiología de la Sociedad Española de Otorrinolaringología y Cirugía de Cabeza y Cuello (SEORL-CCC), junto con las comisiones de Otología y Otoneurología, ha llevado a cabo una revisión del estado actual de los implantes de vía ósea con la finalidad de ofrecer a los especialistas de Otorrinolaringología, a los profesionales de la sanidad, a las autoridades sanitarias y a la sociedad en general una guía clínica sobre implantes de conducción de vía ósea. Métodos: Esta guía clínica sobre implantes de conducción ósea contiene información sobre los siguientes temas: 1) definición y descripción de los implantes auditivos de vía ósea; 2) indicaciones actuales y emergentes de los implantes de vía ósea; compatibilidad y resonancia magnética, y 3) requisitos organizativos para un programa de implantes de vía ósea. Resultado y conclusiones: La finalidad de esta guía es describir los diferentes sistemas de conducción ósea, sus particularidades e indicaciones, con el objeto de aportar unas coordenadas que ayuden a todos estos agentes en las tomas de decisiones que deban asumir en los diferentes ámbitos de responsabilidad en los que están enmarcados en sus áreas de trabajo

Introduction and goals: During the last decade there have been multiple and relevant advances in conduction and mixed hearing loss treatment. These advances and the appearance of new devices have extended the indications for bone-conduction implants. The Scientific Committee of Audiology of the Sociedad Española de Otorrinolaringología y Cirugía de Cabeza y Cuello SEORL-CCC (Spanish Society of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery), together with the Otology and Otoneurology Committees, have undertaken a review of the current state of bone-conduction devices with updated information, to provide a clinical guideline on bone-conduction implants for otorhinolaryngology specialists, health professionals, health authorities and society in general. Methods: This clinical guideline on bone-conduction implants contains information on the following: 1) Definition and description of bone-conduction devices; 2) Current and upcoming indications for bone conduction devices: Magnetic resonance compatibility; 3) Organization requirements for a bone-conduction implant programme. Results and conclusions: The purpose of this guideline is to describe the different bone-conduction implants, their characteristics and their indications, and to provide coordinated instructions for all the above-mentioned agents for decision making within their specific work areas

Clinical guideline on bone conduction implants. / Guía clínica sobre implantes de conducción de vía ósea.

INTRODUCTION AND GOALS: During the last decade there have been multiple and relevant advances in conduction and mixed hearing loss treatment. These advances and the appearance of new devices have extended the indications for bone-conduction implants. The Scientific Committee of Audiology of the Sociedad Española de Otorrinolaringología y Cirugía de Cabeza y Cuello SEORL-CCC (Spanish Society of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery), together with the Otology and Otoneurology Committees, have undertaken a review of the current state of bone-conduction devices with updated information, to provide a clinical guideline on bone-conduction implants for otorhinolaryngology specialists, health professionals, health authorities and society in general. METHODS: This clinical guideline on bone-conduction implants contains information on the following: 1) Definition and description of bone-conduction devices; 2) Current and upcoming indications for bone conduction devices: Magnetic resonance compatibility; 3) Organization requirements for a bone-conduction implant programme. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The purpose of this guideline is to describe the different bone-conduction implants, their characteristics and their indications, and to provide coordinated instructions for all the above-mentioned agents for decision making within their specific work areas.

Patient-Related Benefits for Adults with Cochlear Implantation: A Multicultural Longitudinal Observational Study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess subjectively perceived, real-world benefits longitudinally for unilateral cochlear implant (CI) recipients in a multinational population treated routinely. To identify possible predictors of self-reported benefits. DESIGN: This was a prospective, multicenter, repeated-measures study. Self-assessment of performance at preimplantation and postimplantation at 1, 2, and 3 years using standardized, validated, local language versions of the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ), and the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3) was performed. Outcomes were analyzed using a longitudinal mixed-effects model incorporating country effect. Patient demographics were explored for associations with change over time. SUBJECTS: Two hundred ninety-one routinely treated, unilateral CI recipients, aged 13-81 years, from 9 clinics across 4 countries. RESULTS: Highly significant improvements were observed for all outcome measures (p < 0.0001). Postimplantation, mean outcome scores remained stable beyond 1 year, with notable individual variability. A significant association for one or more outcomes with preimplantation contralateral hearing aid use, telephone use, age at implantation, implantation side, preimplantation comorbidities, dizziness, and tinnitus was observed (p < 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Longitudinal benefits of CI treatment can be measured using clinically standardized self-assessment tools to provide a holistic view of patient-related benefits in routine clinical practice for aggregated data from multinational populations. Self-reported outcomes can provide medical-based evidence regarding CI treatment to support decision-making by health service providers.

Treatment for Hearing Loss among the Elderly: Auditory Outcomes and Impact on Quality of Life.

The study aim was to determine the benefit of cochlear implantation and hearing aids in older adults diagnosed with hearing loss and to evaluate the index of depression, anxiety and quality of life after such treatments. A retrospective cohort comprised 117 patients older than 65 years and diagnosed with moderate to profound hearing loss who were included and classified into 2 groups (treated vs. non-treated). A battery of tests including auditory (pure-tone average, disyllabic words in quiet at 65 dB SPL) and findings from a series of questions relevant to quality of life were compared between both groups. Auditory outcomes for disyllabic words were 58.21% for the cochlear implant-treated group and 82.8% for the hearing aid-treated group. There was a positive effect on anxiety, depression, health status and quality of life in the cochlear implant group versus the profound hearing loss control group. We conclude that older adults with moderate to profound hearing loss gain benefit from hearing aids or cochlear implants not only in terms of improved hearing function, but also in terms of positive effects on anxiety, depression, health status and quality of life.

Long-term follow-up of late onset vestibular complaints in patients with cochlear implant.

CONCLUSION: Patients with cochlear implants should be treated no differently than non-implanted patients with similar symptomatology. OBJECTIVES: To describe the spectrum of symptomatology, treatment, and long-term follow-up of patients with cochlear implant and vestibular complaints. METHODS: This retrospective study included 25 patients with late onset vestibular complaints (more than 1 month post-implantation). Each patient underwent an extensive interrogatory and physical exam with ancillary test to complete a diagnosis. Treatment was given according to this and all patients followed a vestibular rehabilitation program. RESULTS: The total population was 72% male and 28% female, median age was 58 years; minimal follow-up was 9 months (mean = 51, median = 34). Cochleostomy was performed in eight cases and round window insertion was performed in 19 (two patients were removed from each group in the analysis due to their bilateral implantation under a different approach). The mean time from implant to vestibular symptoms was 53 months, median = 32; a Kaplan Meier graphic showed the round window approach has faster onset of symptoms with statistical significance (p = 0.020). The most common complaint was instability in all patients and after both surgical approaches. No difference in symptoms was found with a Kruskall Wallis test except for vertigo spells (more common in the round window approach). In 12 patients the symptomatology was attributed to the implanted side. In the long-term follow-up a relatively high number of patients (20/25) recovered with standard treatment, suggesting the presence of the implant is not associated with poor recovery prognosis.

Organización de un programa de implantes cocleares / Organisation of a cochlear implant programme

Un programa de implantes cocleares (IC) reúne a una serie de profesionales, que durante las fases de selección, cirugía, programación, rehabilitación y seguimiento, desarrollan una serie de tareas enfocadas a promover una atención integral al paciente implantado. El objetivo de esta publicación es describir con detalle cuales son las tareas a realizar en cada una de las fases descritas en un programa de IC, los materiales y equipos necesarios, y el papel que juegan los profesionales implicados. Así mismo, se plantearán una serie de recomendaciones sobre cómo desarrollar de forma paulatina un programa de IC, con el fin de facilitar su progresión desde los casos más sencillos a los más complejos (AU)

The aim of this paper was to describe in detail the tasks in each of the phases described in a programme of CI, materials and necessary equipment and the role of the professionals involved. It also raised a number of recommendations on how to develop a CI programme gradually to facilitate the progression from the simplest to the most complex cases. A cochlear implant (CI) programme brings together a number of professionals who, during the stages of selection, surgery, programming, rehabilitation and monitoring, develop a series of tasks aimed at promoting comprehensive attention to the implanted patient (AU)

[Organisation of a cochlear implant programme]. / Organización de un programa de implantes cocleares.

A cochlear implant (CI) programme brings together a number of professionals who, during the stages of selection, surgery, programming, rehabilitation and monitoring, develop a series of tasks aimed at promoting comprehensive attention to the implanted patient. The aim of this paper was to describe in detail the tasks in each of the phases described in a programme of CI, materials and necessary equipment and the role of the professionals involved. It also raised a number of recommendations on how to develop a CI programme gradually to facilitate the progression from the simplest to the most complex cases.

[Active middle-ear implants]. / Tipos de implantes activos de oído medio.

Active middle ear implants are classified as piezoelectric implants, which use the properties of piezoelectric materials. There are two types of piezoelectric implants: monomorphic and dimorphic; electromagnetic transduction uses a magnet, usually a rare earth magnet (e.g. samarium cobalt) and an energizing coil. This magnetic field causes the magnet to vibrate, which in turn, through the tympanic-ossicular chain, causes movement of the cochlear fluids. Electromechanical transduction is a variation of electromagnetic transduction.

Tipos de implantes activos de oído medio / Active middle-ear implants

Los implantes activos de oído medio se clasifican en implantes piezoeléctricos, que utilizan las propiedades de los materiales piezoeléctricos, y son de dos tipos: monomorfos y dimorfos, y en implantes de transducción electromagnética: se utiliza un imán, generalmente de tierras raras (p. ej., samario cobalto), y una bobina inductora. Este campo magnético provoca la vibración del imán, que al estar acoplado directamente a la cadena tímpano-osicular pone en movimiento los fluidos cocleares. La transducción electromecánica es una variación de la electromagnética (AU)

Active middle ear implants are classified as piezoelectric implants, which use the properties of piezoelectric materials. There are two types of piezoelectric implants: monomorphic and dimorphic; electromagnetic transduction uses a magnet, usually a rare earth magnet (e.g. samarium cobalt) and an energizing coil. This magnetic field causes the magnet to vibrate, which in turn, through the tympanic-ossicular chain, causes movement of the cochlear fluids. Electromechanical transduction is a variation of electromagnetic transduction (AU)

Evaluación audiológica de la población infantil / Audiological evaluation of infantile population

La batería de exploraciones audiológicas disponibles en la actualidad, abarca determinados métodos de exploración que precisan de la colaboración del paciente (métodos conductuales), y otros métodos que no requieren dicha colaboración (métodos objetivos). Ambos se complementan y dan una información audiológica esencial para detectar y diagnosticar precozmente al niño con hipoacusia y tratar así tempranamente su déficit auditivo. Todo ello va a proporcionar al niño con déficit auditivo el desarrollo del lenguaje oral y su integración en la sociedad.