Heywood Rebecca L, Patel Parag M, Jonathan David A
Head and Neck Unit, The Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK.
Ear Nose Throat J. 2011 May;90(5):E21-7. doi: 10.1177/014556131109000514.
We conducted a study of the Baha bone-anchored hearing aid system to quantify the difference between (1) hearing thresholds obtained through preoperative testing methods with the Baha sound processor attached to three different bone-conduction testing devices and (2) thresholds obtained postoperatively with the sound processor attached to a surgically placed osseointegrated titanium implant. Twenty-three patients underwent free-field testing in four situations: with the Baha sound processor attached to (1) the Baha Testband (transcutaneous transmission), (2) the Baha Softband (transcutaneous transmission), (3) a test rod (bone conduction via the teeth), and (4) the osseointegrated implant (percutaneous transmission). The main outcome measure was the result of a comparison of the thresholds obtained with the three preoperative test methods and those obtained with the osseointegrated implant. We found that aided thresholds obtained with the osseointegrated implant were significantly better (p < 0.05) than those obtained with the three preoperative test methods. The degree of superiority increased with higher frequencies. We conclude that thresholds of 1 to 18 dB better than those obtained by preoperative test methods can be expected postoperatively with the osseointegrated implant. The damping effect of sound transmission via the teeth or transcutaneously must be accounted for in making predictions of postoperative outcome.
我们对骨锚式助听器系统进行了一项研究，以量化以下两者之间的差异：（1）通过术前测试方法获得的听力阈值，此时骨锚式助听器的声音处理器连接到三种不同的骨传导测试设备上；（2）术后将声音处理器连接到手术植入的骨整合钛植入物上所获得的阈值。23名患者在四种情况下接受了自由场测试：骨锚式助听器的声音处理器连接到（1）骨锚式测试带（经皮传输）、（2）骨锚式软带（经皮传输）、（3）测试杆（通过牙齿进行骨传导）以及（4）骨整合植入物（经皮传输）。主要观察指标是比较三种术前测试方法所获得的阈值与骨整合植入物所获得的阈值的结果。我们发现，骨整合植入物所获得的助听阈值明显优于（p < 0.05）三种术前测试方法所获得的阈值。优势程度随着频率的升高而增加。我们得出结论，术后使用骨整合植入物预计可获得比术前测试方法所获得的阈值好1至18 dB的阈值。在预测术后结果时，必须考虑通过牙齿或经皮进行声音传输的阻尼效应。
