A comparison study of audiological outcome and compliance of bone conduction implantable hearing implants

Efficacy of the Bonebridge BCI602 for Adult Patients with Single-sided Deafness: A Prospective Multicenter Study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the safety and efficacy of a novel active transcutaneous bone conduction implant (BCI) device for patients with single-sided deafness (SSD).

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Tertiary referral hospitals.

METHODS

This prospective multicenter study was conducted at 15 institutions nationwide. Thirty adult (aged ≥19 years) SSD patients were recruited. They underwent implantation of an active transcutaneous BCI device (Bonebridge BCI602). Objective outcomes included aided pure-tone thresholds, aided speech discrimination scores (SDSs), and the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) and sound localization test results. The Bern Benefit in Single-Sided Deafness (BBSS) questionnaire, the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) questionnaire, and the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI) were used to measure subjective benefits.

RESULTS

The mean aided pure-tone threshold was 34.2 (11.3), mean (SD), dB HL at 500 to 4000 Hz. The mean total BBSS score was 27.5 (13.8). All APHAB questionnaire domain scores showed significant improvements: ease of communication, 33.6 (23.2) versus 22.6 (21.3), P = .025; reverberation, 44.8 (16.6) versus 32.8 (15.9), P = .002; background noise, 55.5 (23.6) versus 35.2 (18.1), P < .001; and aversiveness, 36.7 (22.8) versus 25.8 (21.4), P = .028. Moreover, the THI scores were significantly reduced [47.4 (30.1) versus 31.1 (27.0), P = .003]. Congenital SSD was a significant factor of subjective benefit (-11.643; 95% confidence interval: -21.946 to -1.340).

CONCLUSION

The BCI602 active transcutaneous BCI device can provide functional hearing gain without any adverse effects and is a feasible option for acquired SSD patients with long-term deafness.

Clinical performance, safety, and patient-reported outcomes of an active osseointegrated bone-conduction hearing implant system at 24-month follow-up

PURPOSE

To investigate 2-year post-operative hearing performance, safety, and patient-reported outcomes of hearing-impaired adults treated with the Osia® 2 System, an active osseointegrated bone-conduction hearing implant that uses piezoelectric technology.

METHODS

A prospective, multicenter, open-label, single-arm, within-subject clinical study conducted at three tertiary referral clinical centers located in Melbourne, Sydney and Hong Kong. Twenty adult recipients of the Osia 2 System were enrolled and followed up between 12 and 24 months post-implantation: 17 with mixed or conductive hearing loss and 3 with single-sided sensorineural deafness. Safety data, audiological thresholds, speech recognition thresholds in noise, and patient-reported outcomes were collected and evaluated. In addition, pre-and 6-month post-implantation data were collected retrospectively for this recipient cohort enrolled into the earlier study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04041700).

RESULTS

Between 6- and 24-month follow-up, there was no statistically significant change in free-field hearing thresholds or speech reception thresholds in noise (p =  > 0.05), indicating that aided improvements were maintained up to 24 months of follow-up. Furthermore, improvements in health-related quality of life and daily hearing ability, as well as clinical and subjective measures of hearing benefit remained stable over the 24-month period. No serious adverse events were reported during extended follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

These study results provide further evidence to support the longer term clinical safety, hearing performance, and patient-related benefits of the Osia 2 System in patients with either a conductive hearing loss, mixed hearing loss, or single-sided sensorineural deafness.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04754477. First posted: February 15, 2021.

Long-Term Follow-Up in Active Transcutaneous Bone Conduction Implants

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate long-term outcomes of active transcutaneous bone conduction implants (atBCIs) regarding safety, hearing, and quality of life.

STUDY DESIGN

A clinical study with retrospective medical record analysis combined with prospective audiometry and quality of life questionnaires.

SETTING

Three secondary to tertiary care hospitals.

PATIENTS

All subjects operated with an atBCI in three regions in Sweden were asked for informed consent. Indications for atBCI were single-sided deafness (SSD) and conductive or mixed hearing loss (CMHL).

INTERVENTION

Evaluation of atBCI.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Pure tone and speech audiometry and Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI).

RESULT

Thirty-three subjects were included and 29 completed all parts. The total follow-up time was 124.1 subject-years. Nineteen subjects had CMHL and in this group, pure tone averages (PTA4) were 56.6 dB HL unaided and 29.6 dB HL aided, comparable with a functional gain of 26.0 dB. Effective gain (EG) was -12.7 dB. With bilateral hearing, Word Recognition Scores (WRS) in noise were 36.5% unaided and 59.1% aided. Fourteen subjects had SSD or asymmetric hearing loss (AHL) and in this group, PTA4 were >100 dB HL unaided and 32.1 dB HL aided with the contralateral ear blocked. EG was -9.1 dB. With bilateral hearing, WRSs were 53.2% unaided and 67.9% aided. The means of the total GBI scores were 31.7 for CMHL and 23.6 for SSD/AHL.

CONCLUSION

Few complications occurred during the study. The atBCI is concluded to provide a safe and effective long-term hearing rehabilitation.

Long-Term Non-Users of Transcutaneous Auditory Implants: Thirty Years of Experience at a Single Institution

Background: Although it is a recognized phenomenon, there is little published in the literature on the discontinuation of auditory implant use. Aim: To evaluate the incidence of device non-use of transcutaneous auditory implants. Patients and Methods: This is a retrospective study of all living individuals (children and adults) implanted at the La Paz Hospital (Madrid, Spain) between 1992-2015, with a follow-up examination endpoint of December 2022. 356 device recipients were included: 316 with cochlear implants (CI), 22 with middle-ear implants (Vibrant Soundbridge, VSB), and 18 with bone conduction implants (Bonebridge, BB). Results: Nine CI recipients (2.8%) were identified as non-users (mean follow-up 15.1 ± 5.4 years). The reasons for non-use were implant failure and reimplantation rejection, lack of benefit, non-attendance of rehabilitation sessions, loss of the audio processor, and cognitive and linguistic difficulties. None of them experienced any surgical complications. Six VSB recipients (27.3%) were device non-users (mean follow-up 11.4 ± 2.1 years). All of them experienced device failure or surgical complications. To date, none of the BB recipients is a non-user (mean follow-up 8.6 ± 1.1 years). Conclusion: The rates of non-use of transcutaneous auditory implants vary widely between different types of implants. Given the small proportion of non-users, information on what are the predictive factors could not be determined. The reasons for non-use should be carefully documented and used to guide careful patient selection to reduce the risk of non-use in future candidates.

A comparative study of audiological outcomes and compliance between the Osia system and other bone conduction hearing implants

PURPOSE

To examine the subjective and objective audiological benefits of the Osia system compared to devices commonly implanted prior to the introduction of this system.

METHODS

Osia recipients with either conductive hearing loss (CHL/MHL) (n = 9) or single-sided deafness (SSD) (n = 8) who underwent surgery from February 2021 to March 2022 were prospectively recruited. The audiological outcomes and usage rate of Osia implantees were compared with those of retrospectively recruited patients implanted with other devices (n = 50). The subjective satisfaction of the Osia implantees was also evaluated through questionnaires.

RESULTS

All users of the Osia system were classified as regular users. In the CHL/MHL group, the effective gain of the Osia system (11.1 ± 14.9 dB) surpassed that of the Baha and Bonebridge (- 2.7 ± 12.6 dB) at 2 kHz (p = 0.01, Mann-Whitney U test). Among the devices, the Osia system tended to tolerate the worst bone conduction thresholds, up to the level of 61 dB. In the SSD group, the functional gain of Osia at 4 kHz (37.5 ± 3.1 dB) was higher than that of the Baha and Bonebridge group (26.9 ± 3.0 dB) (p = 0.05, Mann-Whitney U test).

CONCLUSION

The Osia system yielded larger audiological gain than the Baha Attract and Bonebridge devices, especially at high frequencies, leading to substantially higher compliance. The Osia system tended to have the strongest tolerance to aggravated bone conduction thresholds among the available transcutaneous bone conduction hearing implants. Therefore, the Osia system could potentially be a good option for CHL/MHL patients with bone conduction thresholds of 50 dB HL or more, as well as patients with SSD.

Multicentric study on surgical information and early safety and performance results with the Bonebridge BCI 602: an active transcutaneous bone conduction hearing implant

AIM

This European multicentric study aimed to prove safety and performance of the Bonebridge BCI 602 in children and adults suffering from either conductive hearing loss (CHL), mixed hearing loss (MHL), or single-sided sensorineural deafness (SSD).

METHODS

33 patients (13 adults and 10 children with either CHL or MHL and 10 patients with SSD) in three study groups were included. Patients were their own controls (single-subject repeated measures), comparing the unaided or pre-operative to the 3-month post-operative outcomes. Performance was evaluated by sound field thresholds (SF), word recognition scores (WRS) and/or speech reception thresholds in quiet (SRT) and in noise (SNR). Safety was demonstrated with a device-specific surgical questionnaire, adverse event reporting and stable pure-tone measurements.

RESULTS

The Bonebridge BCI 602 significantly improved SF thresholds (+ 25.5 dB CHL/MHL/SSD), speech intelligibility in WRS (+ 68.0% CHL/MHL) and SRT in quiet (- 16.5 dB C/MHL) and in noise (- 3.51 dB SNR SSD). Air conduction (AC) and bone conduction (BC) thresholds remained stable over time. All adverse events were resolved, with none unanticipated. Mean audio processor wearing times in hours [h] per day for the CHL/MHL group were ~ 13 h for adults, ~ 11 h for paediatrics and ~ 6 h for the SSD group. The average surgical length was 57 min for the CHL/MHL group and 42 min for the SSD group. The versatility of the BCI 602 (reduced drilling depth and ability to bend the transition for optimal placement) allows for treatment of normal, pre-operated and malformed anatomies. All audiological endpoints were reached.

CONCLUSIONS

The Bonebridge BCI 602 significantly improved hearing thresholds and speech understanding. Since implant placement follows the patient's anatomy instead of the shape of the device and the duration of surgery is shorter than with its predecessor, implantation is easier with the BCI 602. Performance and safety were proven for adults and children as well as for the CHL/MHL and SSD indications 3 months post-operatively.

Comparison of passive versus active transcutaneous bone anchored hearing devices in the pediatric population

Objective

Transcutaneous bone anchored hearing devices (BAHDs) were introduced in an effort to avoid potential complications associated with the abutment of percutaneous BAHDs. Transcutaneous BAHDs can be active or passive. While studies have demonstrated good outcomes with both, a direct comparison of audiological and clinical outcomes of these devices in the pediatric population has not yet been studied.

Study design

Retrospective, multicenter study.

Setting

Two tertiary academic centers.

Methods

Between 2015 and 2019, all patients who received an active transcutaneous BAHD (Bonebridge, BB) at one center, and patients that received a passive transcutaneous BAHD (Attract, AT) at another center, were included in this study. Exclusion criteria included age > 18 years, and mixed hearing loss or single-sided deafness. Study outcomes included patient demographics, indications, complications and preoperative and one-year postoperative audiometric data.

Results

Eighteen BB and eight AT patients met the inclusion criteria. The age range was 5–16 years. There were no significant differences in complication outcomes. Both devices demonstrated similar mean improvements in hearing thresholds at frequencies of 250 Hz (38 dB Active vs. 38 dB Passive), 500 Hz (34 dB vs. 42 dB), 1000 Hz (34 dB vs. 40 dB) and 2000 Hz (31 dB vs. 22 dB). The BB was significantly more effective at frequencies of 4000 Hz (28 dB vs. 7 dB) and 8000 Hz (29 dB vs. 6 dB) (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

This is the first study comparing audiological outcomes between an active and a passive transcutaneous BAHD in the pediatric population. While both devices improved audiometric outcomes in the low and mid frequencies, the active BAHD demonstrated significantly better outcomes in the higher frequencies.

Graphical Abstract

Hearing outcomes in children with single sided deafness: Our experience at a tertiary paediatric otorhinolaryngology unit

INTRODUCTION

Hearing rehabilitation options for single sided deafness (SSD) include contralateral routing of sound (CROS) aids and bone conduction devices (BCDs). This study aimed to review the management of children with SSD at our tertiary paediatric otolaryngology unit over the last 15 years.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed. Primary hearing outcomes were measured using the Children's Home Inventory for Listening Difficulties (CHILD) questionnaire score and secondary hearing outcomes were measured using hearing thresholds for speech in noise. Outcomes were measured pre and post bone conduction device (BCD) trial.

RESULTS

49 patients with SSD were identified. 20 children had trial of a BCD. 16 patients had pre- and post- BCD trial CHILD scores available for analysis. There was a statistically significant improvement in CHILD scores and speech in noise testing at +5 dB and +0 dB following amplification with a BCD. The mean use of BCD was 1.3 h per day.

DISCUSSION

We have described the management of children with SSD in our unit. This study demonstrated a statistically significant benefit of BCD use on hearing outcomes. However, device compliance is low suggesting hearing advice choice in the population is complex and further research is warranted.

[Clinical research progress of bonebridge implantation]

Implantable bonebridge（BB） is suitable for patients over 5 years with conductive/mixed hearing loss and unilateral deafness, and the surgical approach depends on the anatomical structure of the patient's ear. Recent studies have shown that compared with other implantable hearing devices, implantable BB have more efficient hearing gain and lower incidence of complications. However, the postoperative effect of implantable BB on unilateral deafness patients and the poor compensation of low-frequency hearing threshold need to be further studied. This article reviews the clinical research on implantable BB, so as to provide some reference for clinicians to select hearing devices for patients individually.

Transcutaneous Bone Conduction Implants in Patients With Single-Sided Deafness: Objective and Subjective Evaluation

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to investigate the audiological outcomes and subjective benefits of transcutaneous bone conduction implants (BCIs) in patients with single-sided deafness (SSD).

METHODS

This retrospective study was conducted on 11 patients with SSD implantations between 2015 and 2018 at a tertiary center. Pure-tone audiometry, speech reception threshold (SRT), and speech-in-noise (SPIN) tests were performed. Preoperative and postoperative performances were compared. Subjective satisfaction level was assessed using validated questionnaires. A PubMed search was conducted to identify the relevant studies published to date.

RESULTS

All patients demonstrated significant audiological improvements compared with their preoperative condition. The mean SRT improved significantly (p = 0.001) from 109 dB to 23 dB after implantation. The mean SPIN score improved significantly after implantation. The questionnaires showed an overall positive benefit of transcutaneous bone conduction devices (BCDs). A literature search revealed 21 articles, of which 14 reported the use of BCIs in patients with SSD. Our results agree with the published evidence showing the overall benefit of BCI in patients with SSD.

CONCLUSIONS

Transcutaneous BCDs could be considered as an alternative treatment option for patients with SSD, it could show good audiological outcomes and high satisfaction levels. Further studies should be conducted on patients with SSD to determine the most appropriate hearing solutions.

The bone conduction implant BONEBRIDGE increases quality of life and social life satisfaction

PURPOSE

Transcutaneous active bone conduction hearing aids represent an alternative approach to middle ear surgery and conventional hearing aids for patients with conductive or mixed hearing loss. The aim of this study was to determine quality of life, subjective hearing experience and patients' satisfaction after implantation of a bone conduction hearing aid.

METHODS

This monocentric and retrospective study included twelve adult patients who received a bone conduction hearing aid (Bonebridge, MedEL) consisting of an extracorporeal audio processor and a bone conduction implant (BCI) between 2013 and 2017. On average 40 months after implantation, the patients were asked to answer three questionnaires regarding quality of life (AqoL-8D), self-reported auditory disability (SSQ-12-B) and user's satisfaction (APSQ) after implantation of the Bonebridge (BB). A descriptive statistical analysis of the questionnaires followed.

RESULTS

12 patients aged 26-85 years (sex: m = 7, w = 5) were recruited. The quality of life of all patients after implantation of the BB (AqoL 8D) averaged an overall utility score of 0.76 (SD ± 0.17). The mean for 'speech hearing' in the SSQ-12-B was + 2.43 (SD ± 2.03), + 1.94 (SD ± 1.48) for 'spatial hearing' and + 2.28 (SD ± 2.32) for 'qualities of hearing'. 11 out of 12 patients reported an improvement in their overall hearing. The APSQ score for the subsection 'wearing comfort' was 3.50 (SD ± 0.87), 'social life' attained a mean of 4.17 (SD ± 1.06). The 'device inconveniences' reached 4.02 (SD ± 0.71) and 'usability' of the device was measured at 4.23 (SD ± 1.06). The average wearing time of the audio processor in the cohort was 11 h per day, with 8 of 12 patients reporting the maximum length of 12 h per day.

CONCLUSION

BB implantation results in a gain in the perceived quality of life (AqoL 8D). The SSQ-12-B shows an improvement in subjective hearing. According to the APSQ, it can be assumed that the BB audio processor, although in an extracorporeal position, is rated as a useful instrument with positive impact on social life. The majority stated that they had subjectively benefited from BB implantation and that there were no significant physical or sensory limitations after implantation.

Device profile of the Bonebridge bone conduction implant system in hearing loss: an overview of its safety and efficacy

INTRODUCTION

The Bonebridge is an active transcutaneous semi-implantable bone conduction hearing device suitable for several types of hearing loss. It has unique benefits over some more established technologies. It consists of an internal active implant and an external sound processor. It was first launched in 2012, with a newer model released in late 2019.

AREAS COVERED

The structure and features of the device are described. Indications, audiological criteria, and contraindications to implantation are discussed. The planning and procedure of implantation surgery are also described. Research outlining the outcomes of implant use and risk of adverse events is highlighted.

EXPERT OPINION

The evidence included in this article demonstrates the successful audiological outcomes and patient satisfaction with Bonebridge implantation. The rate of adverse events following surgery is low and compares well with other devices which may be considered for Bonebridge candidates. The device should be considered as an option for suitable candidates and in many cases may be the better option available, given the low incidence of skin complications and the absence of a skin penetrating abutment. Future advances are likely to affect sound processor technology, connectivity, and possibly further reduction in implant size and gain.