Complications of bone-conduction hearing implants (BCHI) implantation surgery

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.

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.

Hearing rehabilitation with osseointegrated hearing implant in bilateral congenital external auditory canal atresia

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Congenital atresia of the external auditory canal (EAC) is a congenital defect present in one in every 10,000-20,000 births. It causes conductive hearing loss, with an air-bone gap of 50-60dB. Early amplification is essential in bilateral cases to ensure normal language development. The aim of this study is to present the osseointegrated hearing implant as a treatment for bilateral EAC atresia, reviewing the audiometric results and the rate of complications.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis of patients diagnosed with bilateral congenital EAC atresia under follow-up in the pediatric ENT clinic of the ENT and Head and Neck Surgery department of a Portuguese Tertiary Hospital, between 2003 and 2019. We reviewed the medical records and collected information on the assessment of the initial audiometric status. In the cases submitted for implantation with an osseointegrated hearing implant, we analyzed the details of follow-up, including immediate and long-term post-operative complications, as well as the audiometric results.

RESULTS

We present 8 pediatric patients, 6 girls and 2 boys, with a diagnosis of bilateral congenital EAC atresia. The audiometric assessment revealed moderate to severe bilateral conductive hearing loss with a mean speech recognition threshold (SRT) of 51dB. Six patients underwent osseointegrated hearing implantation. All 6 patients showed good audiometric results, with an average SRT of 20dB and closure of the air-bone gap.

CONCLUSIONS

The osseointegrated hearing implant was an effective treatment option in these patients, without significant morbidity or complications. Osseointegrated hearing implantation should be considered first line treatment for children with bilateral congenital EAC atresia, as it presents good functional results and a high level of patient satisfaction.

Hearing rehabilitation with osseointegrated hearing implant in bilateral congenital external auditory canal atresia

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Congenital atresia of the external auditory canal (EAC) is a congenital defect present in one in every 10,000-20,000 births. It causes conductive hearing loss, with an air-bone gap of 50-60dB. Early amplification is essential in bilateral cases to ensure normal language development. The aim of this study is to present the osseointegrated hearing implant as a treatment for bilateral EAC atresia, reviewing the audiometric results and the rate of complications.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis of patients diagnosed with bilateral congenital EAC atresia under follow-up in the pediatric ENT clinic of the ENT and Head and Neck Surgery department of a Portuguese Tertiary Hospital, between 2003 and 2019. We reviewed the medical records and collected information on the assessment of the initial audiometric status. In the cases submitted for implantation with an osseointegrated hearing implant, we analyzed the details of follow-up, including immediate and long-term post-operative complications, as well as the audiometric results.

RESULTS

We present 8 pediatric patients, 6 girls and 2 boys, with a diagnosis of bilateral congenital EAC atresia. The audiometric assessment revealed moderate to severe bilateral conductive hearing loss with a mean speech recognition threshold (SRT) of 51dB. Six patients underwent osseointegrated hearing implantation. All 6 patients showed good audiometric results, with an average SRT of 20dB and closure of the air-bone gap.

CONCLUSIONS

The osseointegrated hearing implant was an effective treatment option in these patients, without significant morbidity or complications. Osseointegrated hearing implantation should be considered first line treatment for children with bilateral congenital EAC atresia, as it presents good functional results and a high level of patient satisfaction.