TY - JOUR
T1 - Amplification options in unilateral aural atresia: An active middle ear implant or a bone conduction device?
AU - Agterberg, Martijn J H
AU - Frenzel, Henning
AU - Wollenberg, Barbara
AU - Somers, Thomas
AU - Cremers, Cor W R J
AU - Snik, Ad F M
PY - 2014/1/1
Y1 - 2014/1/1
N2 - BACKGROUND: There is no consensus on treatment of patients with congenital unilateral aural atresia. Currently, 3 intervention options are available, namely, surgical reconstruction, application of a bone-conduction device (BCD), or application of a middle ear implant. OBJECTIVE: The present study aims to compare the BCD with the application of a middle ear implant. We hypothesized that cross-hearing (stimulating the cochlea by means of bone conduction contralateral to the implanted side) would cause BCD users to have difficulty performing localization tasks. METHODS: Audiologic data of 4 adult patients with a middle ear implant coupled directly to the cochlea were compared with data of 4 adult patients fitted with an osseointegrated BCD. All patients were fitted during adulthood. The emphasis of this study is on directional hearing. RESULTS: The middle ear implant and the BCD improved sound localization of patients with congenital unilateral aural atresia. Unaided scores demonstrate a large variation. CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate that there was no advantage of the middle ear implant over the BCD for directional hearing in patients who had no amplification in childhood. The BCD users had the best bandwidth.
AB - BACKGROUND: There is no consensus on treatment of patients with congenital unilateral aural atresia. Currently, 3 intervention options are available, namely, surgical reconstruction, application of a bone-conduction device (BCD), or application of a middle ear implant. OBJECTIVE: The present study aims to compare the BCD with the application of a middle ear implant. We hypothesized that cross-hearing (stimulating the cochlea by means of bone conduction contralateral to the implanted side) would cause BCD users to have difficulty performing localization tasks. METHODS: Audiologic data of 4 adult patients with a middle ear implant coupled directly to the cochlea were compared with data of 4 adult patients fitted with an osseointegrated BCD. All patients were fitted during adulthood. The emphasis of this study is on directional hearing. RESULTS: The middle ear implant and the BCD improved sound localization of patients with congenital unilateral aural atresia. Unaided scores demonstrate a large variation. CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate that there was no advantage of the middle ear implant over the BCD for directional hearing in patients who had no amplification in childhood. The BCD users had the best bandwidth.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84891825639&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/MAO.0b013e31829b579f
DO - 10.1097/MAO.0b013e31829b579f
M3 - Journal articles
C2 - 23988995
AN - SCOPUS:84891825639
SN - 1531-7129
VL - 35
SP - 129
EP - 135
JO - Otology and Neurotology
JF - Otology and Neurotology
IS - 1
ER -