Audiologic and surgical outcomes of a novel, nonpercutaneous, bone conducting hearing implant.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the selection criteria, surgical technique, audiologic, and quality of life outcomes for a novel, nonpercutaneous bone conductor hearing aid. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case review. SETTING: Secondary otology practice. PATIENTS: Eighteen patients (16 adults and 2 children). INTERVENTION: Implantation of unilateral (n = 16) or bilateral (n = 2) devices. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean preoperative and postoperative air conduction and bone conduction free-field testing, BKB-SIN aided and unaided at 0-degree 70 dB SPL, Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ), aided and unaided measures of localization and discrimination in single-sided deafness (SSD), surgical complications. RESULTS: Implants have been fixed under general or local anesthesia without perioperative complications. Two patients noted minor skin irritation only. Audiologic gain was greatest for those with bilateral conductive loss (21.9 ± 10.4 dB HL). For those with bilateral and unilateral mixed loss, gain was 6.2 ± 5.3 dB HL and 5.5 ± 6.5 dB HL, respectively. A greater improvement was seen with BKB-SIN at 70 dB SPL at 0 with all groups except for SSD, gaining statistically significant benefit. Localization and discrimination studies in patients with SSD or unilateral conductive loss failed to detect benefit from aiding. SSQ scores show an improvement in all domains for each patient group. CONCLUSION: The surgical procedure requires no specialized equipment and can be performed as a day case. This device complements treatment for patients requiring bone conduction aids and presents as an alternative to conventional percutaneous bone-anchored implants.

Maximal medical therapy for chronic rhinosinusitis: a survey of otolaryngology consultants in the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: The management of chronic rhinosinusitis is based on a trial of "maximal medical therapy" before surgery is considered. Ear-Nose-Throat (ENT) UK consultant members were surveyed to determine the role and variability of UK-wide practices. METHODS: A survey was posted to all ENT UK consultant members (n = 603). This assessed the frequency of prescription, duration, and type of oral antibiotics, steroids, and antihistamines for chronic rhinosinusitis. RESULTS: A total of 158 questionnaires (26.3%) were returned. Of these, 61% were primarily rhinologists. The use of decongestants, antifungals, and immunotherapy was generally limited. Oral antibiotics were often used, with clarithromycin of <5 weeks duration being the preferred choice. Sixty-one percent of consultants always prescribe a steroid spray, most commonly mometasone furoate (75%). CONCLUSION: Although most respondents use triple therapy of oral antibiotics, steroid nasal spray, and saline douching to some extent, "maximal medical therapy" for chronic rhinosinusitis seems to vary greatly among consultants and frequently does not reflect recent guidelines.