Evaluation of the Bonebridge BCI 602 active bone conductive implant in adults: efficacy and stability of audiological, surgical, and functional outcomes.
Bone conduction
Bone conduction implant
Bonebridge
Hearing loss
Partial deafness treatment
Quality of life
Transcutaneous hearing implant
Journal
European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery
ISSN: 1434-4726
Titre abrégé: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9002937
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jul 2022
Jul 2022
Historique:
received:
22
11
2021
accepted:
10
01
2022
pubmed:
20
2
2022
medline:
27
5
2022
entrez:
19
2
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
(1) To assess the effectiveness and safety of a bone-conduction implant, the Bonebridge BCI 602, in adults with conductive or mixed hearing loss. (2) To investigate whether the Bonebridge BCI 602 is at least as effective as the Bonebridge BCI 601 in such patients. The study group included 42 adults who had either conductive or mixed hearing loss. All patients underwent Bonebridge BCI 602 implant surgery. Before and after implantation, pure-tone audiometry, speech recognition tests (in quiet and noise), and free-field audiometry were performed. Word recognition scores were evaluated using the Polish Monosyllabic Word Test. Speech reception thresholds in noise were assessed using the Polish Sentence Matrix Test. Subjective assessment of benefits was done using the APHAB (Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit) questionnaire. The APHAB questionnaire showed that difficulties in hearing decreased after BCI 602 implantation. Both word recognition in quiet and speech reception threshold in noise were significantly better after BCI 602 implantation and remained stable for at least 12 months. A significant advantage of the device is a reduced time for surgery while maintaining safety. In this study, the mean time for BCI 602 implantation was 28.3 min ± 9.4. The second-generation Bonebridge BCI 602 implant is an effective hearing rehabilitation device for patients with conductive or mixed hearing loss. Patient satisfaction and audiological results confirm its efficacy and safety. Its new shape and dimensions allow it to be used in patients previously excluded due to insufficient or difficult anatomical conditions. The new BCI 602 implant is as effective as its predecessor, the BCI 601.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35182185
doi: 10.1007/s00405-022-07265-2
pii: 10.1007/s00405-022-07265-2
pmc: PMC9130189
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
3525-3534Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Audiol Neurootol. 2019;24(2):90-99
pubmed: 31141814
PLoS One. 2019 Sep 16;14(9):e0221484
pubmed: 31525208
Otol Neurotol. 2016 Jul;37(6):713-20
pubmed: 27153327
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2019 Mar;118:97-102
pubmed: 30599287
Saudi Med J. 2019 Aug;40(8):797-801
pubmed: 31423516
Acta Otolaryngol. 2016 Jun;136(6):556-8
pubmed: 26981711
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2019 Apr;119:54-58
pubmed: 30665177
Int J Audiol. 2018 Jan;57(1):53-60
pubmed: 28857620
Int J Audiol. 2021 Apr;60(4):239-245
pubmed: 32985284
Am J Case Rep. 2020 Nov 10;21:e925914
pubmed: 33168798
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2022 Jan;279(1):101-113
pubmed: 33674927
Otol Neurotol. 2019 Sep;40(8):998-1005
pubmed: 31318785
Life (Basel). 2021 Apr 22;11(5):
pubmed: 33921929
Ear Hear. 1995 Apr;16(2):176-86
pubmed: 7789669
HNO. 2020 Aug;68(Suppl 2):106-115
pubmed: 32725263
Am J Otolaryngol. 2021 Mar-Apr;42(2):102895
pubmed: 33429176
Otol Neurotol. 2014 Feb;35(2):216-20
pubmed: 24448280
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2019 Aug;276(8):2165-2170
pubmed: 31053966
Laryngoscope. 2014 Dec;124(12):2802-6
pubmed: 25142577
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1995 Sep;113(3):186-7
pubmed: 7675477
Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2021 Jul;130(7):724-730
pubmed: 33143454
Aust Fam Physician. 2016 Jun;45(6):366-9
pubmed: 27622223
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2021 Sep;278(9):3203-3209
pubmed: 32965538
ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec. 2015;77(1):17-26
pubmed: 25661010
Otol Neurotol. 2019 Aug;40(7):858-864
pubmed: 31295197
Otol Neurotol. 2016 Jul;37(6):685-91
pubmed: 27093021
Am J Case Rep. 2021 May 12;22:e929933
pubmed: 33976104
Auris Nasus Larynx. 2019 Oct;46(5):681-686
pubmed: 30635142
Otol Neurotol. 2021 Sep 1;42(8):1208-1215
pubmed: 34191781
J Clin Med. 2019 Oct 03;8(10):
pubmed: 31623414
Otol Neurotol. 2020 Jun;41(5):709-714
pubmed: 32080026
Otol Neurotol. 2018 Aug;39(7):874-881
pubmed: 29847467
Trends Hear. 2019 Jan-Dec;23:2331216519862982
pubmed: 31322032
Otol Neurotol. 2016 Mar;37(3):267-75
pubmed: 26859460
J Laryngol Otol. 2018 Aug;132(8):693-697
pubmed: 30008276
Acta Otolaryngol. 2020 Mar;140(3):212-219
pubmed: 32068449
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2017 May;274(5):2107-2115
pubmed: 28032241
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2017 Apr;274(4):1835-1851
pubmed: 27475796
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2017 Oct;274(10):3593-3598
pubmed: 28756570
Int J Audiol. 2020 May;59(5):392-397
pubmed: 31944127
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2017 Aug;274(8):3011-3019
pubmed: 28534117
Med Sci Monit. 2021 Sep 25;27:e933915
pubmed: 34561413