Audiologic and Surgical Outcomes of a Novel, Nonpercutaneous, Bone Conducting Hearing Implant

A Non-Surgical Wearable Option for Bone Conduction Hearing Implants: A Comparative Study with Conventional Bone Conduction Hearing Aids Mounted on Eyeglasses

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to compare the audiological benefits of a non-implantable wearable option for a bone conduction (BC) implant mounted on an arch (SoundArc) to those of traditional BC hearing aids (HAs) mounted on eyeglasses (BCHAs) in patients with moderate to severe conductive or mixed hearing loss.

METHODS

A preliminary cross-sectional observational prospective cohort study was conducted in the Tertiary Audiological Department, University Hospital. Fourteen adults with conductive or mixed hearing loss (PTA at 0.5-1-2-4 KHz = 67 ± 15 dB HL) who had been wearing conventional BCHAs mounted on eyeglasses for at least 3 years and had declined surgical implantation of a bone conduction hearing implant (BCHI) were included in the study. Unaided and aided pure-tone air conduction (AC) and bone conduction (BC) thresholds, as well as speech tests in quiet and noise, were recorded at baseline and in two different settings: with a BCHI mounted on SoundArc® and with their own BCHAs mounted on eyeglasses using two couplers. Participants completed questionnaires in both conditions, including the International Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA), the Hearing Handicap Inventory for Adults/Elderly (HHIA/E), the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ), a 10-point visual analog scale (VAS), and the Fatigue Impact Scale (FIS).

RESULTS

A significant functional gain was observed in both settings (p = 0.0001). Better speech perception in quiet and noise was observed with SoundArc compared to conventional BCHAs on eyeglasses (improvements in word repetition scores in noise: +19.3 at SNR +10 dB, p = 0.002; +12.1 at SNR 0 dB, p = 0.006; and +11.4 at SNR -10 dB, p = 0.002). No significant differences were found in IOI-HA, FIS, and HHIA/E scores. However, significantly better SSQ scores were reported for SoundArc in all domains (p = 0.0038).

CONCLUSIONS

Although patients were accustomed to using BCHAs mounted on eyeglasses, the bone conduction wearable option of the BCHI (SoundArc) proved to be a viable alternative for adult patients with conductive or mixed hearing loss who are unable or unwilling to undergo BCHI surgery.

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

Audiological results and subjective benefit of an active transcutaneous bone-conduction device in patients with congenital aural atresia

PURPOSE

To review functional and subjective benefit after implantation of an active transcutaneous bone conduction device (BCD) in patients with congenital microtia with atresia or stenosis of the external auditory canal.

METHODS

Retrospective chart analysis and questionnaire on the subjective impression of hearing ( Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ-B) of patients treated between 2012 and 2015.

RESULTSRESULTS

18 patients (24 ears) with conductive or mixed hearing loss in unilateral (n = 10) or bilateral (n = 8) atresia were implanted with a BCD. No major complications occurred after implantation. Preoperative unaided air conduction pure tone average at 0.5, 1, 2 and 4 kHz (PTA 4 ) was 69.2 ± 11.7 dB, while postoperative aided PTA 4 was 33.4 ± 6.3 dB, resulting in a mean functional hearing gain of 35.9 +/- 15.6 dB. Preoperatively, the mean monosyllabic word recognition score was 22.9 % ± 22.3 %, which increased to 87.1 % +/- 15.1 % in the aided condition. The Oldenburger Sentence Test at S₀N₀ revealed a decrease in signal-to-noise-ratio from - 0.58 ± 4.40 dB in the unaided to - 5.67 ± 3.21 dB in the postoperative aided condition for all patients investigated. 15 of 18 patients had a subjective benefit showing a positive SSQ-B score (mean 1.7).

CONCLUSION

The implantation of an active bone conduction device brings along subjective and functional benefit for patients with conductive or combined hearing loss.

Psychosocial outcome measures for conductive and mixed hearing loss treatment: An overview of the relevant literature

OBJECTIVE

To identify the psychosocial assessments utilized with individuals with conductive and/or mixed hearing loss as part of a broader effort by the Auditory Rehabilitation Outcomes Network (AURONET) group to develop a core set of patient-centred outcome measures.

DESIGN

A review of articles published between 2006 and 2016 was completed. Included studies had more than three adult participants, were available in English, and reported a psychosocial outcome from any treatment of mixed and/or conductive hearing loss.

STUDY SAMPLE

Sixty-six articles from seven databases.

RESULTS

Sixty-six articles met our inclusion/exclusion criteria. Within this set, 15 unique psychosocial or patient-reported outcome measures (PROs) were identified, with the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) and Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) being the most frequently dispensed. Five of the fifteen were only administered in one study. In-house questionnaires (IHQs) were reported in 19 articles.

CONCLUSIONS

Only 66 (22%) of the 300 articles with outcomes contained a PRO. Some of the mostly frequently employed PROs (e.g., APHAB) were judged to include only social items and no psychological items. Lack of PRO standardization and the use of IHQs make psychosocial comparisons across treatments in this population difficult for patients, clinicians and stakeholders.

Auditory Performance and Subjective Satisfaction with the ADHEAR System

BACKGROUND

The ADHEAR device, a new nonsurgical bone conduction hearing device, has been developed for patients with conductive hearing loss.

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to assess the impact of the ADHEAR device on the audiological performance and satisfaction level in subjects with conductive hearing loss.

METHODS

Twelve patients with conductive hearing loss were included. All patients received the device for 3 months. The audiological outcomes were determined using basic audiological assessments, including pure tone audiometry and sound field measurements of pure tone and speech audiometry with the contralateral ear occluded with a specific earplug. Additionally, the patients were subjectively evaluated using (1) the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities Questionnaire (SSQ), and (2) the custom-made ADHEAR questionnaire.

RESULTS

Analysis of the measured audiological outcomes revealed an average improvement in pure tone thresholds (functional gain) of 23 (± 4.4) dB HL when the ADHEAR system was used compared to the unaided condition in the sound field. Moreover, speech reception thresholds improved by an average of 23 (± 15.3) dB SPL in the aided condition with plugged contralateral ear. Additionally, when using ADHEAR in the sound field, subjects' speech recognition scores improved by 32% (± 17.7) in quiet and 21% (± 15.1) in the presence of interfering noise. The average SSQ questionnaire scores improved from 3.9 at the study initiation to 6.6 after 3 months of device usage. ADHEAR custom questionnaire assessments revealed high satisfaction and acceptance of the device with no pain or skin irritation.

CONCLUSION

During the study period, this new adhesive system yielded improved audiological outcomes with high patient satisfaction and acceptance and no reported skin irritation or pain.

Transcutaneous bone conductive implants in patients with conductive/mixed hearing loss: audiological outcomes in noise condition

BACKGROUND

Recently, the use of transcutaneous bone conduction implants (BCIs) has been increased. However, scarce data about BCI hearing recovery in noise conditions have been reported.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the audiological benefits obtained with transcutaneous BCI-Sophono Alpha System in noise conditions. To evaluate post-implantation clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction levels.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fourteen patients suffering from conductive or mixed hearing loss implanted with the Sophono Alpha System were evaluated. Patients underwent physical examination, free-field pure-tone and speech audiometry both in unaided and aided conditions. The matrix sentence test was employed with fixed noise at 65 dB, and with a fluctuating primary signal, in three different conditions of noise presentations (S0/N0, S0/Ncontra, S0/Nipsi).

RESULTS

Hearing gain, expressed as the difference between pre-implant AC and post-implant SAS free field, was on average 26.7 dB. The unaided speech recognition score in quiet conditions had a mean value of 64.6%, and improved after SAS implantation, achieving mean values of 98.2%. SRT₅₀ with the matrix sentence test improved in all three conditions of noise presentation.

CONCLUSIONS

Sophono Alpha System devices represent a valid treatment option for hearing rehabilitation of patients with conductive or mixed hearing loss. The audiological results regarding hearing gain in noise conditions were good.

The Sophono bone-conduction system: Surgical, audiologic, and quality-of-life outcomes

We prospectively evaluated the surgical, audiologic, and quality-of-life outcomes in 5 patients-2 men and 3 women, aged 22 to 64 years (mean: 41.8)-who were implanted with the Sophono Alpha 2 MPO Processor. The indications for implantation of this bone-conduction device included recurrent ear canal infections with hearing aids (n = 3), single-sided deafness (n = 1), and patient preference in view of difficulty using a conventional hearing aid (n = 1). In addition to the patient with single-sided deafness, 3 patients had a bilateral mixed hearing loss and 1 had a bilateral conductive hearing loss. Outcomes measures included surgical complications, functional gain (FG), speech discrimination in quiet and noise, and patient satisfaction as determined by the Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) and the Entific Medical Systems bone-anchored hearing aid questionnaire (BAQ). The only postsurgical complication noted was a minor skin reaction and pain in 1 patient that resolved with conservative management. In the 3 patients with the mixed hearing loss, the mean FG was 13.3, 20.0, 11.7, and 11.7 dB at 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz, respectively; in the patient with the bilateral conductive hearing loss, the FG was 10, 25, 10, and 15 dB at the same frequencies. Speech discrimination scores with the Sophono device were comparable to those seen with conventional hearing aids. After implantation, all 5 patients experienced a positive quality-of-life outcome according to the GBI, although 1 of them had only a marginal improvement. On follow-up, all patients reported that they remained satisfied with their implant and that they used their device all day long. We conclude that the Sophono bone-conduction system is a safe and effective option that should be considered for patients with a mixed or conductive hearing loss who are unable to use a conventional hearing aid, as well as for those with single-sided deafness.

Passive Transcutaneous Bone Conduction Hearing Implants: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the literature on currently available passive transcutaneous bone conduction hearing implants (pTCBI) with regard to complications, audiological outcomes, and quality-of-life scores.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane Library.

STUDY SELECTION

All identified English-language articles reporting on the implantation of currently available pTCBI's and their complications. Both pediatric and adult patients were included. No limitation was placed on study design or level of evidence.

DATA EXTRACTION

Complications, audiological outcomes including mean pure-tone average gain and mean speech reception threshold gain, and quality-of-life outcomes.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Twenty-six articles were included in the review. Four hundred eighty-two pTCBIs have been reported in the literature. Major complications including skin breakdown, wound dehiscence, hematoma, seroma, and inability to use the device occurred in 5.2% of patients. Minor complications including pain and self-resolving erythema at the implant site occurred in 13.1% of the patients. The weighted mean pure-tone average gain of the two included devices was 28.4 ± 2.1 dB and the mean speech reception threshold gain was 32.9 ± 3.9 dB. Favorable quality-of-life scores have been demonstrated with pTCBIs.

CONCLUSION

pTCBIs are a viable alternative to percutaneous devices in a carefully selected group of patients. These devices have demonstrated good audiological outcomes, low morbidity, and high patient satisfaction.

A Bone Conduction Implantable Device as a Functional Treatment Option in Unilateral Microtia with Bilateral Stapes Ankylosis: A Report of Two Cases

BACKGROUND Implantable devices have been proposed as an alternative to hearing aids and auditory canal reconstruction in patients with microtia (congenital aural atresia), which includes a malformation of the external and middle ear. This report is of two rare cases of microtia associated with congenital stapes ankylosis treated with an implantable device and describes the treatment outcomes. CASE REPORT Two siblings from Ecuador, a 29-year-old woman, and her 35-year-old brother, were born with unilateral type II microtia with bilateral external auditory canal atresia and conductive hearing loss. Pre-operatively, high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) imaging was performed using FastView software to allow placement of a bone conduction-floating mass transducer (BC-FMT) to couple a Bonebridge bone conduction implant (BCI) system in both patients. Pure-tone audiometry (PTA) testing and speech audiology were performed. The Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) and the Speech, Spatial and Qualities (SSQ) of hearing scale questionnaires and scoring systems were used. Following activation of the implantable device, both patients achieved improved bilateral conductive hearing with sound-field (field-free) thresholds >25 dB, and speech recognition scores >90%. In both cases, hearing improvement remained at three years following surgery. CONCLUSIONS To our knowledge, these are the first reported cases of microtia with congenital stapes ankylosis successfully treated with a bone conduction implantable device. Patients with microtia and stapes ankylosis who are reluctant to undergo surgery may benefit from unilateral or bilateral, short-term or long-term use of a Bonebridge bone conduction implantable device.

Implantable hearing devices

Combined hearing loss is an essential indication for implantable hearing systems. Depending on the bone conduction threshold, various options are available. Patients with mild sensorineural deafness usually benefit from transcutaneous bone conduction implants (BCI), while percutaneous BCI systems are recommended also for moderate hearing loss. For combined hearing losses with moderate and high-grade cochlear hearing loss, active middle ear implants are recommended. For patients with incompatibilities or middle ear surgery, implants are a valuable and proven addition to the therapeutic options.

Preliminary audiologic and peri-operative outcomes of the Sophono™ transcutaneous bone conduction device: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To delineate the auditory functional improvement and peri-operative outcomes of the Sophono™ transcutaneous bone conduction device.

METHODS

Eligible articles presenting patients implanted with the Sophono™ were identified through a comprehensive search of PubMed and Embase electronic databases. All relevant articles were reviewed to justify inclusion independently by 2 authors. Studies that successfully passed critical appraisal for directness of evidence and risk of bias were included.

RESULTS

From a total of 125 articles, 8 studies encompassing 86 patients using 99 implants were selected. Most patients (79.1%) were children. Ear atresia (67.5%) was the most frequently reported indication for Sophono™ implantation. Overall pure tone average auditory improvement was 31.10 (±8.29) decibel. During a mean follow-up time of 12.48 months, 25 patients (29%) presented with post-operative complications from which 3 were deemed as serious implant-related adverse events (3.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

The Sophono™ transcutaneous bone conduction device shows promising functional improvement, no intra-operative complications and minor post-operative skin related complications. If suitable, the device could be a proposed solution for the rehabilitation of hearing in children meeting eligibility criteria. A wearing schedule must be implemented in order to reduce magnet-related skin complications.

A Comparative Study of Audiologic Outcomes for Two Transcutaneous Bone-Anchored Hearing Devices

OBJECTIVE

In 1977, Tjellstrom et al. used the concept of osseointegration and implanted patients with a titanium screw as part of the first bone-anchored hearing solution. Despite good hearing outcomes with the percutaneous device, there has been a drive for the development of transcutaneous bone conduction systems because of soft tissue complications, aesthetics, and loss or failure of the abutment. This study compares audiologic and quality of life questionnaire outcomes (author-designed questionnaire) for two transcutaneous bone conduction implants.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional cohort study.

SETTING

Tertiary referral hospital and national audiology service.

PATIENTS

Twelve patients, 10 children and two adults. Six recipients of each device.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Pure-tone audiometry, aided thresholds, speech discrimination scores, and quality of life questionnaire results.

RESULTS

The unaided four-frequency average air conduction for affected ears was 60.8 dB HL for the Attract group and 57.8 dBHL for the Sophono group; these improved to mean aided thresholds of 30.6 dB HL and 29.8 dB HL, respectively. Therewas no statistical difference between the speech discrimination scores for the two devices in quiet at 55 dB SPL (p = 0.33) orin noise (p = 0.87).

CONCLUSION

Both systems provide audiologic benefit compared with the unaided situation. Comparing small numbers of patients, there was no significant difference in aided thresholds or speech discrimination scores between these two transcutaneous bone-anchored implants. All Attract and Sophono users reported improvement in quality of life and would recommend their device to others in a similar situation.

Audiological Results and Quality of Life of Sophono Alpha 2 Transcutaneous Bone-Anchored Implant Users in Single-Sided Deafness

Single-sided deafness (SSD) represents one of the most difficult audiological conditions to rehabilitate. The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the audiological benefits and quality of life of patients affected by SSD who had previously been users of the Alpha 1® when upgrading them to the Sophono Alpha 2® external processor (Boulder, Colo., USA). Nine patients were included in the study. They underwent physical examination, free-field speech audiometry at 40 and 60 dB, a hearing-in-noise test (Hirsch's test and the squelch test), the Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) questionnaire, and a specific questionnaire on patient satisfaction with Alpha 1. Afterwards, the Alpha 2 external processor was delivered to all patients, and the above-mentioned protocol was repeated after 1 month with the Alpha 2. A statistically significant improvement was found in the speech discrimination score at 40 dB and in the squelch test when using the Alpha 2 external processor compared to the Alpha 1. Alpha 2 had a good clinical tolerance and gave similar results in the specific questionnaire and the GBI to Alpha 1. In conclusion, the new Alpha 2 external processor represents a safe and effective device for the rehabilitation of SSD, and there is an audiological benefit to upgrading to the Alpha 2 external processor for patients who had previously been users of the Alpha 1. The improvement in quality of life is similar to that with other bone-anchored hearing devices.

Three-year experience with the Sophono in children with congenital conductive unilateral hearing loss: tolerability, audiometry, and sound localization compared to a bone-anchored hearing aid

Bone conduction devices (BCDs) are advocated as an amplification option for patients with congenital conductive unilateral hearing loss (UHL), while other treatment options could also be considered. The current study compared a transcutaneous BCD (Sophono) with a percutaneous BCD (bone-anchored hearing aid, BAHA) in 12 children with congenital conductive UHL. Tolerability, audiometry, and sound localization abilities with both types of BCD were studied retrospectively. The mean follow-up was 3.6 years for the Sophono users (n = 6) and 4.7 years for the BAHA users (n = 6). In each group, two patients had stopped using their BCD. Tolerability was favorable for the Sophono. Aided thresholds with the Sophono were unsatisfactory, as they did not reach under a mean pure tone average of 30 dB HL. Sound localization generally improved with both the Sophono and the BAHA, although localization abilities did not reach the level of normal hearing children. These findings, together with previously reported outcomes, are important to take into account when counseling patients and their caretakers. The selection of a suitable amplification option should always be made deliberately and on individual basis for each patient in this diverse group of children with congenital conductive UHL.

New developments in bone-conduction hearing implants: a review

The different kinds of bone-conduction devices (BCDs) available for hearing rehabilitation are growing. In this paper, all BCDs currently available or in clinical trials will be described in categories according to their principles. BCDs that vibrate the bone via the skin are referred to as skin-drive devices, and are divided into conventional devices, which are attached with softbands, for example, and passive transcutaneous devices, which have implanted magnets. BCDs that directly stimulate the bone are referred to as direct-drive devices, and are further divided into percutaneous and active transcutaneous devices; the latter have implanted transducers directly stimulating the bone under intact skin. The percutaneous direct-drive device is known as a bone-anchored hearing aid, which is the BCD that has the largest part of the market today. Because of some issues associated with the percutaneous implant, and to some extent because of esthetics, more transcutaneous solutions with intact skin are being developed today, both in the skin-drive and in the direct-drive category. Challenges in developing transcutaneous BCDs are mostly to do with power, attachment, invasiveness, and magnetic resonance imaging compatibility. In the future, the authors assume that the existing percutaneous direct-drive BCD will be retained as an important rehabilitation alternative, while the transcutaneous solutions will increase their part of the market, especially for patients with bone-conduction thresholds better than 35 dB HL (hearing level). Furthermore, the active transcutaneous direct-drive BCDs appear to be the most promising systems, but to establish more detailed inclusion criteria, and potential benefits and drawbacks, more extensive clinical studies are needed.

Bone anchored hearing aids in children

Bone-anchored hearing devices have evolved over recent years. This article provides an overview of the device history, indications, evolution of surgical technique, evidence for benefit and focuses on the challenges that are faced in the pediatric population.