Division of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, QEII Health Sciences Centre,, Dalhousie University, 3184 Dickson Building, 5820 University Avenue, Halifax, NS, B3H 2Y9, Canada.
J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2022 Nov 12;51(1):44. doi: 10.1186/s40463-022-00595-5.
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.
Retrospective, multicenter study.
Two tertiary academic centers.
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.
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).
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.
为避免经皮骨锚定听力设备(BAHD)植入相关的潜在并发症,引入了经皮骨锚定听力设备。经皮 BAHD 可分为有源和无源。虽然研究表明这两种设备都有良好的效果,但尚未研究这些设备在儿科人群中的听力和临床效果的直接比较。
回顾性、多中心研究。
两个三级学术中心。
2015 年至 2019 年,在一个中心接受有源经皮骨锚定听力设备(Bonebridge,BB)治疗的所有患者,以及在另一个中心接受无源经皮骨锚定听力设备(Attract,AT)治疗的患者,均纳入本研究。排除标准包括年龄>18 岁,以及混合性听力损失或单侧耳聋。研究结果包括患者人口统计学、适应证、并发症以及术前和术后一年的听力数据。
18 例 BB 和 8 例 AT 患者符合纳入标准。年龄范围为 5-16 岁。并发症结果无显著差异。两种设备在 250Hz(38dB 主动 vs. 38dB 被动)、500Hz(34dB vs. 42dB)、1000Hz(34dB vs. 40dB)和 2000Hz(31dB vs. 22dB)频率的听力阈值改善方面均有相似的平均改善。BB 在 4000Hz(28dB vs. 7dB)和 8000Hz(29dB vs. 6dB)频率的效果明显更好(p<0.05)。
这是第一项比较有源和无源经皮骨锚定听力设备在儿科人群中听力效果的研究。虽然两种设备都改善了低频和中频的听力结果,但有源 BAHD 在高频的效果明显更好。