Evaluation of a super powerful bone-anchored hearing system and its users: A retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION: Although the Baha 5SP has been commercially available for six years, very few studies have been performed on the device's efficacy. The current study aims to evaluate the characteristics and audiological results in patients with severe-to-profound mixed hearing loss fitted with this superpower sound processor. METHODS: This retrospective evaluation was conducted at a tertiary referral centre where a series of 82 adult patients with severe-to-profound mixed hearing loss were implanted with a percutaneous bone-anchored hearing system and fitted with a superpower sound processor between 2016 and 2019. Patients with incomplete or unreliable audiological data (n = 24) were excluded, resulting in 58 data sets for analysis. The main outcome measures were unaided and aided pure-tone thresholds and aided free-field speech perception in quiet. RESULTS: The median unaided air conduction (AC) threshold averaged across 0.5, 1 and 2 kHz (PTA0.5-2kHz) of all patients was 75 dB hearing loss (HL); the median unaided AC averaged across 1, 2 and 4 kHz (PTA1-4kHz) was 84 dB HL. For bone conduction and direct bone conduction, the median PTA0.5-2kHz was 52 and 47 dB HL, respectively. With the superpower device, the median free-field speech reception threshold was 54 dB sound pressure level (SPL), and the median speech perception score at 65 dB SPL was 80%. CONCLUSIONS: At least 75% of the patients reached a maximum phoneme score of 70%. For patients with lower scores, the superpower device still provides a substantial hearing benefit. This makes the superpower device particularly suitable for patients with severe-to-profound mixed hearing loss with a contraindication for conventional hearing aids and/or cochlear implants.

Long-Term Outcomes of a Percutaneous Wide-Diameter Bone-Anchored Hearing Implant: A Clinical Evaluation of More than 800 Implants.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluates the clinical outcomes of 807 percutaneous wide-diameter bone-anchored hearing implants (BAHIs) in 701 patients. In addition, it compares patient groups and examines bone conduction device (BCD) usage. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. Mean follow-up period of 3.8 years. SETTING: Tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: All patients implanted with a percutaneous wide-diameter BAHI until December 2020 were included. Patients were divided into age groups, "loading-time" groups, and, if applicable, specific subgroups thought to be at risk for complications postsurgery, e.g., intellectual disability and comorbidities. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Soft tissue reaction, implant survival, revision surgery, and BCD usage. RESULTS: In 9.1% of the 5,188 observations of 807 implants, an adverse soft tissue reaction was reported according to the Holgers' scale. Significantly more (adverse) soft tissue reactions were observed in children and intellectually disabled (ID) patients (p < 0.05). Comorbidity subgroups showed no significant differences in soft tissue reactions. Implant loss percentage, including explantations, was 6.2%. Implant survival was significantly worse in patients with ID (14.1%; p = 0.021). Pediatric age, early loading, or comorbidities did not significantly influence implant survival. At least 592 implants (73.4%) were used for bone conduction hearing, of which 65.4% were used daily. CONCLUSION: Both children and ID patients are more prone to (adverse) soft tissue reactions, ID patients only have a higher risk of implant loss. The rate of implant loss in children seemed to be reduced compared to previous studies and thus more comparable to adults since using wide-diameter implants.

Long-Term Results of the Linear Incision Technique With Tissue Reduction Versus Tissue Preservation for Inserting Bone-Anchored Hearing Implants: The Ongoing Optimization in Bone Implant Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the long-term outcomes of the linear incision technique with tissue reduction (LIT-TR) and the linear incision technique with tissue preservation (LIT-TP) for inserting bone-anchored hearing implants (BAHIs). STUDY DESIGN: Single-center retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Large general teaching hospital. PATIENTS: A total of 231 adult patients were included between August 2005 and October 2020, with a minimum follow-up time of 6 months. INTERVENTION: The test group received a BAHI using the LIT-TP (N = 147). The control group underwent surgery using the LIT-TR (N = 84). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Soft tissue reactions, skin thickening, postoperative complications (e.g., wound dehiscence), and implant loss were compared between the test and control group. Furthermore, Cochlear Bone Anchored Solutions AB (Mölnlycke, Sweden) and Oticon Medical AB (Askim, Sweden) implants/abutments within the LIT-TP cohort were compared. Validated questionnaires were used to quantify patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). RESULTS: Significantly more cases with wound dehiscence and adverse soft tissue reactions (Holgers ≥2) were observed in the LIT-TR cohort (p < 0.001). However, the LIT-TP cohort showed significantly more cases with skin thickening (requiring treatment) within the first 2 years after implantation. There were no differences in implant loss rates, overall soft tissue reactions (Holgers >1), and overall HRQoL between the two patient groups. Significant improvement in the patients' HRQoL after implementation of a BAHI was found in both techniques. The Ponto Wide implant/abutment showed less frequent skin thickening (requiring treatment) and fewer soft tissue reactions compared with the BIA400 implant/abutment. CONCLUSION: This large-scale study demonstrates that the LIT-TP shows excellent long-term outcomes, including a low incidence of implant failure.

Post-implantation clinical cost analysis between transcutaneous and percutaneous bone conduction devices.

INTRODUCTION: Bone conduction devices (BCD) are effective for hearing rehabilitation in patients with conductive and mixed hearing loss or single-sided deafness. Transcutaneous bone conduction devices (tBCD) seem to lead to fewer soft tissue complications than percutaneous BCDs (pBCD) but have other drawbacks such as MRI incompatibility and higher costs. Previous cost analyses have shown a cost advantage of tBCDs. The purpose of this study is to compare long-term post-implantations costs between percutaneous and transcutaneous BCDs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective data from 77 patients implanted in a tertiary referral centre with a pBCD (n = 34), tBCD (n = 43; passive (tpasBCD; n = 34) and active (tactBCD; n = 9) and a reference group who underwent cochlear implantation (CI; n = 34), were included in a clinical cost analysis. Post-implantation costs were determined as the sum of consultation (medical and audiological) and additional (all post-operative care) costs. Median (cumulative) costs per device incurred for the different cohorts were compared at 1, 3 and 5 years after implantation. RESULTS: After 5 years, the total post-implantation costs of the pBCD vs tpasBCD were not significantly different (€1550.7 [IQR 1174.6-2797.4] vs €2266.9 [IQR 1314.1-3535.3], p = 0.185), nor was there a significant difference between pBCD vs tactBCD (€1550.7 [1174.6-2797.4] vs €1428.8 [1277.3-1760.4], p = 0.550). Additional post-implantation costs were significantly highest in the tpasBCD cohort at all moments of follow-up. CONCLUSION: Total costs related to post-operative rehabilitation and treatments are comparable between percutaneous and transcutaneous BCDs up to 5 years after implantation. Complications related to passive transcutaneous bone conduction devices appeared significantly more expensive after implantation due to more frequent explantations.

Subjective Fatigue in Children With Unaided and Aided Unilateral Hearing Loss.

OBJECTIVES: Fatigue is frequently observed in children with chronic diseases and can affect the quality of life (QoL). However, research in children with unilateral hearing loss (UHL) is scarce. Subsequently, no studies investigated the effects of hearing aids on fatigue in children. This study investigates subjective fatigue and hearing-related QoL in children with UHL. Furthermore, it evaluates the influence of hearing aids, subject-specific factors, and respondent-type on subjective fatigue. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional study was conducted from June 2020 until September 2020 at the department of otorhinolaryngology in a tertiary referral center. METHODS: The primary outcome was the difference in subjective fatigue and hearing-related QoL between children with unaided UHL, aided UHL, and normal hearing. Subjective fatigue and hearing-related QoL were measured using the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory™ Multidimensional Fatigue Scale (PedsQL™-MFS) and Hearing Environments and Reflection on Quality of Life (HEAR-QL™) questionnaires. RESULTS: Along with 36 aided children with UHL, 34 unaided and 36 normal-hearing children were included. Child reports revealed significantly more cognitive fatigue in children with aided UHL than children with normal hearing (median difference 12.5, P = .013). Parents reported more fatigue in children with UHL compared to normal-hearing siblings. Especially children with aided UHL seemed at increased risk for fatigue. Children with UHL scored lower on hearing-related QoL than children with normal hearing. No apparent differences were found in fatigue and QoL between children with unaided and aided UHL. CONCLUSION: Children with unaided and even aided UHL seem to experience more subjective fatigue and lower hearing-related QoL than children with normal hearing. Prospective longitudinal studies are required to investigate the influence of hearing aids on fatigue and QoL in individual patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Laryngoscope, 2021 Laryngoscope, 133:189-198, 2023.

Prediction of obstructive sleep apnea: comparative performance of three screening instruments on the apnea-hypopnea index and the oxygen desaturation index.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the performance of the NoSAS (neck, obesity, snoring, age, sex) score, the STOP-Bang (snoring, tiredness, observed apneas, blood pressure, body mass index, age, neck circumference, gender) questionnaire, and the Epworth sleepiness score (ESS) as a screening tool for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) severity based on the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) and the oxygen desaturation index (ODI). METHODS: Data from 235 patients who were monitored by ambulant polysomnography (PSG) were retrospectively analyzed. OSA severity was classified based on the AHI; similar classification categories were made based on the ODI. Discrimination was assessed by the area under the curve (AUC), while predictive parameters were calculated by four-grid contingency tables. RESULTS: The NoSAS score and the STOP-Bang questionnaire were both equally adequate screening tools for the AHI and the ODI with AUC ranging from 0.695 to 0.767 and 0.684 to 0.767, respectively. Both questionnaires perform better when used as a continuous variable. The ESS did not show adequate discrimination for screening for OSA (AUC ranging from 0.450 to 0.525). Male gender, age, and BMI proved to be the strongest individual predictors in this cohort. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to evaluate the predictive performance of three different screening instruments with respect to both the AHI and the ODI. This is important, due to increasing evidence that the ODI may have a higher reproducibility in the clinical setting. The NoSAS score and the STOP-Bang questionnaire proved to be equally adequate to predict OSA severity based on both the AHI and the ODI.