Implantation of Bone-Anchored Hearing Devices Through a Minimal Skin Punch Incision Versus the Epidermal Flap Technique.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the minimal skin punch incision without additional skin incision or soft tissue reduction with the epidermal flap technique and soft tissue reduction, for the implantation of percutaneous bone-anchored hearing devices.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Tertiary care referral center.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Two hundred seventeen patients underwent 220 implantations. Sixty five cases underwent implantation by means of a skin punch resection without soft tissue reduction (punch group) and 155 cases underwent epidermal flap and soft tissue reduction (dermatome group). Main outcome measures were duration of surgery, perioperative adverse events, skin tolerance, and revision surgery.

RESULTS

The duration of surgery was shorter in the punch group (p < 0.001). The percentage of normal to moderate skin reactions, by Holgers classification, was higher in the punch group (90%) than in the dermatome group (84%). No severe reactions occurred in the punch group, but did occur in 7% in the dermatome group. These differences, although clinically important, did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.071). The rate of revision surgeries was not significantly different between the two groups. The indication for revision was different: mainly for skin issues in the dermatome group, against implant dislocation in the punch group.

CONCLUSION

The implantation of the currently available percutaneous bone-anchored hearing implants with a minimal skin punch resection shortened duration of surgery and improved postoperative appearance, while preserving a good skin tolerance. In the punch group, there were less skin issues leading to revision surgery, however we did observe more implant dislocations needing revision surgery.