Lee J M, Jeon J H, Moon I S, Choi J Y
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Ilsan Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine, Goyang, Korea.
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2017 Jun;37(3):218-223. doi: 10.14639/0392-100X-1146.
In this retrospective chart review we compared the subjective and objective benefits of active middle ear implants (AMEIs) with conventional hearing aids (HAs) in patients with sloping high tone hearing loss. Thirty-four patients with sensorineural hearing loss were treated with AMEIs. Of these, six had sloping high tone hearing loss and had worn an HA for more than 6 months. Objective assessments, a pure-tone audiogram, as well as a word recognition test, and the Korean version of the Hearing in Noise Test (K-HINT), and a subjective assessment, the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) questionnaire, were performed. Tests were conducted under three circumstances: 1) the unaided state before surgery; 2) the HA-aided state before surgery; and 3) the AMEI-aided state 3 months after surgery. The average high-frequency hearing gain (≥ 2 kHz) was significantly better with AMEIs than with HAs. Although the result had no statistical significance, AMEIs showed a superior word recognition score (WRS) compared to HAs. However, the most comfortable hearing level at which the WRS was tested was significantly decreased with an AMEI compared to an HA. In the K-HINT, patients with an AMEI showed greater recognition than those fitted with an HA under both quiet and noisy conditions. The APAHB scores revealed that patients were more satisfied with an AMEI rather than an HA on all subscales. The use of vibroplasty in patients with sloping high tone loss resulted in positive hearing outcomes when compared to conventional HAs. Based on the data from this study, AMEIs provided better objective and subjective results and could, therefore, be a better alternative for the treatment of sloping hearing loss.
在这项回顾性病历审查中，我们比较了有源中耳植入物（AMEIs）与传统助听器（HAs）对患有陡降型高频听力损失患者的主观和客观益处。34例感音神经性听力损失患者接受了AMEIs治疗。其中，6例患有陡降型高频听力损失，且佩戴HA超过6个月。进行了客观评估，包括纯音听力图、单词识别测试以及韩语版噪声环境下听力测试（K-HINT），还有主观评估，即助听器益处简表（APHAB）问卷。测试在三种情况下进行：1）手术前未佩戴辅助设备状态；2）手术前HA辅助状态；3）手术后3个月AMEI辅助状态。AMEIs的平均高频听力增益（≥2kHz）显著优于HAs。尽管结果无统计学意义，但与HAs相比，AMEIs的单词识别得分（WRS）更高。然而，与HA相比，使用AMEI测试WRS时的最舒适听力水平显著降低。在K-HINT中，使用AMEI的患者在安静和嘈杂条件下的识别能力均优于佩戴HA的患者。APAHB评分显示，患者在所有子量表上对AMEI的满意度均高于HA。与传统HA相比，对患有陡降型高频听力损失的患者使用振动成形术可带来积极的听力结果。基于本研究数据，AMEIs提供了更好的客观和主观结果，因此可能是治疗陡降型听力损失的更好选择。
