Systematic Review on the Trial Period for Bone Conduction Devices in Single-Sided Deafness: Rates and Reasons for Rejection.

Otol Neurotol

*Department of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery †Brain Center Rudolf Magnus, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Published: June 2017

Objective: To systematically review the literature to evaluate the trial period of bone conduction devices (BCDs) for adult patients with single-sided deafness (SSD).

Data Sources: The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from their inception up to August 15, 2016 for SSD, BCD, and their synonyms.

Study Selection: In total, 523 articles were retrieved, of which 12 satisfied the eligibility quality criteria. Our outcomes of interest were: 1) the BCD implantation rejection percentage, 2) reasons to reject BCD implantation, and 3) possible prognostic factors predicting the trial outcome.

Data Extraction And Synthesis: At critical appraisal, six studies (n = 471 patients) scored a moderate to high directness of evidence and a medium or low risk of bias and were selected for data extraction. Due to heterogeneity between studies, pooling of data for meta-analysis was not feasible. Therefore, results of studies were summarized per outcome: 1) after the BCD trial, 32.0 to 69.6% of SSD patients rejected BCD implantation, 2) the three main reasons for rejection were experiencing limited benefit from the device, patients fearing or being unfit for surgery and cosmetic aspects, 3) no clear prognostic factors predicting the trial outcome could be identified.

Conclusion: Roughly half of patients rejected BCD implantation after a trial period. From the current literature it is unclear which patients could benefit most from BCD implantation. High level of evidence studies should be conducted to investigate possible prognostic factors that predict the BCD trial outcome.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000001405DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

bcd implantation
20
trial period
12
prognostic factors
12
period bone
8
bone conduction
8
conduction devices
8
single-sided deafness
8
reasons rejection
8
bcd
8
factors predicting
8

Similar Publications

Background: This study aimed to evaluate patient satisfaction and usage patterns of bone conduction devices (BCDs) for hearing rehabilitation, focusing on both users and non-users. Specific objectives included assessing reasons for non-use, exploring patient perceptions of BCD efficacy, and examining complications associated with BCD implantation.

Methods: A monocentric investigation was conducted at the Department of Ear, Nose, and Throat Diseases, Head and Neck Surgery at General Hospital Sint-Jan, Bruges.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Placing implants deep sub-gingivally may affect the accuracy of implant impression techniques and the fit of final restoration.

Purpose: The aim of this in-vitro study was to evaluate the effect of soft tissue thickness on accuracy of conventional and digital implant impression techniques.

Methods: Four parallel implant analogues (A, B, C, D) placed in each of two epoxy resin models representing edentulous mandible covered by flexible polyurethane material with two different thickness two mm and four mm.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

There is currently a lack of prospective studies comparing multiple treatment options for single-sided deafness (SSD) in terms of long-term sound localization outcomes. This randomized controlled trial (RCT) aims to compare the objective and subjective sound localization abilities of SSD patients treated with a cochlear implant (CI), a bone conduction device (BCD), a contralateral routing of signals (CROS) hearing aid, or no treatment after two years of follow-up. About 120 eligible patients were randomized to cochlear implantation or to a trial period with first a BCD on a headband, then a CROS (or vice versa).

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Objective: A new, active transcutaneous bone conduction device (BCD) was FDA-approved in 2019 in the USA. This systematic review sought to evaluate early outcomes associated with Osia implantation.

Methods: A systematic review was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Examination of Various Abutment Designs Behavior Depending on Load Using Finite Element Analysis.

Biomimetics (Basel)

August 2024

Metallurgical Materials Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Sakarya University, 54050 Sakarya, Turkey.

Studies on dental implant abutments' geometric design and material selection offer significant innovations and results. These studies aim to improve the abutments' functionality and aesthetic performance, minimize microcavities' formation, and ensure implant-supported prostheses' longevity. For example, CAD-CAM fabricated custom abutments have been found to produce a better marginal fit and fewer microgaps than standard abutments.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!