Bonebridge® bone conduction implant. Hearing outcomes and quality of life in patients with conductive/mixed hearing loss

Comparison of Quality of Life Outcomes for Percutaneous Versus Transcutaneous Implantable Hearing Devices: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare quality of life (QOL) outcomes of percutaneous and transcutaneous bone conduction devices (pBCD and tBCD, respectively).

DATABASES REVIEWED

Pubmed, Scopus, CINAHL.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed searching for English language articles from inception to March 15, 2023. Studies reporting QOL outcomes measured using a validated tool following implantation of either pBCDs or tBCDs were considered for inclusion. QOL outcomes included scores for Glasgow Benefit Inventory, Glasgow Children's Benefit Inventory, Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit, and the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale. A meta-analysis of continuous measures was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 52 articles with 1,469 patients were included. Six hundred eighty-nine patients were implanted with pBCDs, and the remaining 780 were implanted with tBCDs. Average Glasgow Benefit Inventory scores for the tBCD group (33.0, 95% confidence interval [22.7-43.3]) were significantly higher than the pBCD group (30.9 [25.2-36.6]) (Δ2.1 [1.4-2.8], p < 0.0001). Mean Glasgow Children's Benefit Inventory scores (Δ3.9 [2.0-5.8], p = 0.0001) and mean gain in Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit scores (Δ5.6 [4.8-6.4], p < 0.0001) were significantly higher among patients implanted with tBCDs than those implanted with pBCDs. Patients implanted with tBCDs also had significantly higher gains on the Speech (Δ1.1 [0.9-1.3], p < 0.0001), Spatial (Δ0.8 [0.7-0.9], p < 0.0001), and Qualities of Hearing (Δ1.2 [1.1-1.3], p < 0.0001) portions of the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale than those implanted with pBCDs.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients implanted with transcutaneous devices had better QOL outcomes than those implanted with percutaneous devices.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging Artifact Associated With Transcutaneous Bone Conduction Implants: Cholesteatoma and Vestibular Schwannoma Surveillance

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the magnetic resonance (MR) image artifact and image distortion associated with the two transcutaneous bone conduction implants currently available in the United States.

STUDY DESIGN

Cadaveric study.

METHODS

Two cadaveric head specimens (1 male, 1 female) were unilaterally implanted according to manufacturer guidelines and underwent MR imaging (General Electric and Siemens 1.5 T scanners) under the following device conditions: (1) no device, (2) Cochlear Osia with magnet and headwrap, (3) Cochlear Osia without magnet, and (4) MED-EL Bonebridge with magnet. Maximum metal mitigation techniques were employed in all conditions, and identical sequences were obtained. Blinded image scoring (diagnostic vs nondiagnostic image) was performed by experienced neuroradiologists according to anatomical subsites.

RESULTS

All device conditions produced artifact and image distortion. The Osia with magnet produced diagnostic T1- and T2-weighted images of the ipsilateral temporal bone, however, non-echo planar imaging diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) was nondiagnostic. The Osia without magnet scanned on the Siemens MR imaging demonstrated the least amount of artifact and was the only condition that allowed for diagnostic imaging of the ipsilateral temporal bone on DWI. The Bonebridge produced a large area of artifact and distortion with the involvement of the ipsilateral and contralateral temporal bones.

CONCLUSION

In summary, of the three device conditions (Osia with magnet, Osia without magnet, and Bonebridge), Osia without magnet offered the least amount of artifact and distortion and was the only condition in which diagnostic DWI was available for the middle ear and mastoid regions on the Siemens MR imaging scanner.