Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
3.9
3.3
Journals
Brain Sciences
Special Issues
Middle Ear and Bone Conduction Implants
share announcement

Middle Ear and Bone Conduction Implants

A special issue of Brain Sciences (ISSN 2076-3425). This special issue belongs to the section "Neuro-otology and Neuro-ophthalmology".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (4 September 2023) | Viewed by 5861

Special Issue Editors

Dr. Luca Bruschini

E-Mail Website1 Website2
Guest Editor
Department of Surgical, Medical and Molecular Pathology and Critical Care Medicine, University of Pisa, 56124 Pisa, Italy
Interests: Middle Ear; Ear; Hearing Disorders; Inner ear; Otology; Hearing Loss; Vertigo; Audiology; Hearing Aids
Dr. Francesco Lazzerini

E-Mail Website1 Website2
Guest Editor Assistant
GEA - Otolaryngology, Audiology and Phoniatrics Unit, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
Interests: otology; audiology; cochlear implant; vestibology; otoneurology

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

During the last 25 years, middle ear implants and bone conduction implants have joined conventional external hearing aids and cochlear implants in the rehabilitation of hearing loss. Middle ear implants and bone conduction implants can solve some typical hearing aid problems, such as feedback, signal distortion, occlusion of the external auditory canal, malformation of the external ear, and chronic skin infections. Many different types of middle ear implants and bone conduction implants are available on the market. Despite some previously published evidence regarding the speech perception gain and the additional benefits of using a middle ear or bone conduction implant over traditional amplification, many professionals could benefit from an updated overview of the topic, collected in a Special Issue.
Therefore, the Special Issue "Middle Ear and Bone Conduction Implants" will include all the aspects related to the benefits and the pitfalls of these devices. Furthermore, this Special Issue could contribute to the knowledge in this field, widening the evidence on hearing restoration with these implantable devices. The surgical, audiological, and economic aspects will be deeply explored by authors, who are invited to contribute their original studies, reviews, or meta-analyses on the subject.

Dr. Luca Bruschini
Guest Editor

Dr. Francesco Lazzerini
Guest Editor Assistant

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Brain Sciences is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2200 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • middle ear implant
  • bone conduction implant
  • otology
  • hearing loss

Published Papers (4 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review, Other

15 pages, 1447 KiB  
Article
The Role of Bone-Anchored Hearing Devices and Remote Microphones in Children with Congenital Unilateral Hearing Loss
by Francesco Lazzerini, Luca Bruschini, Giacomo Fiacchini, Pietro Canzi, Stefano Berrettini and Francesca Forli
Brain Sci. 2023, 13(10), 1379; https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci13101379 - 28 Sep 2023
Viewed by 997
Abstract
Congenital unilateral hearing loss (UHL) represents a contemporary audiologic challenge. Children with UHL can struggle with understanding speech in noise, localizing sounds, developing language, and maintaining academic performance, leading to low self-esteem, anxiety, and decreased social support. Two specific conditions related to UHL [...] Read more.
Congenital unilateral hearing loss (UHL) represents a contemporary audiologic challenge. Children with UHL can struggle with understanding speech in noise, localizing sounds, developing language, and maintaining academic performance, leading to low self-esteem, anxiety, and decreased social support. Two specific conditions related to UHL in children are single-sided deafness (SSD) and unilateral auris atresia (UAA). This was a retrospective observational study on a group of children with UHL. The Simplified Italian Matrix Sentence Test was used for the assessment of speech reception threshold (SRT) in different conditions: speech and noise from the front (S0N0), speech at 45° from the side of the better ear and noise at 45° from the opposite side (SbNw), and vice versa (SwNb). Each test was conducted unaided, with a bone-anchored hearing device (BAHD), and with a remote microphone (RM) system. The use of a BAHD and RM led to an improvement in SRT in S0N0 and SwNb conditions. The SSD subgroup demonstrated significant benefits with both devices in SwNb, and the UAA subgroup from the use of BAHD in S0N0. In conclusion, the study underscores the potential benefits of both devices in enhancing speech perception for UHL children, providing insights into effective intervention strategies for these challenging cases. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Middle Ear and Bone Conduction Implants)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

11 pages, 686 KiB  
Article
Comparison of Active Bone Conduction Hearing Implant Systems in Unilateral and Bilateral Conductive or Mixed Hearing Loss
by Andrea Canale, Anastasia Urbanelli, Maria Gragnano, Valerio Bordino and Andrea Albera
Brain Sci. 2023, 13(8), 1150; https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci13081150 - 31 Jul 2023
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 863
Abstract
Background: To assess and compare binaural benefits and subjective satisfaction of active bone conduction implant (BCI) in patients with bilateral conductive or mixed hearing loss fitted with bilateral BCI and patients with monaural conductive hearing loss fitted with monaural BCI. Methods: ITA Matrix [...] Read more.
Background: To assess and compare binaural benefits and subjective satisfaction of active bone conduction implant (BCI) in patients with bilateral conductive or mixed hearing loss fitted with bilateral BCI and patients with monaural conductive hearing loss fitted with monaural BCI. Methods: ITA Matrix test was performed both on patients affected by bilateral conductive or mixed hearing loss fitted with monaural bone conduction hearing implant (Bonebridge, Med-El) before and after implantation of contralateral bone conduction hearing implant and on patients with monaural conductive or mixed hearing loss before and after implantation of monaural BCI. The Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) questionnaire was administered to both groups of subjects and the results were compared with each other. Results: Patients of group 1 reported a difference of 4.66 dB in the summation setting compared to 0.79 dB of group 2 (p < 0.05). In the squelch setting, group 1 showed a difference of 2.42 dB compared to 1.53 dB of group 2 (p = 0.85). In the head shadow setting, patients of group 1 reported a difference of 7.5 dB, compared to 4.61 dB of group 2 (p = 0.34). As for the APHAB questionnaire, group 1 reported a mean global score difference of 11.10% while group 2 showed a difference of −4.00%. Conclusions: Bilateral BCI in patients affected by bilateral conductive or mixed hearing loss might show more advantages in terms of sound localisation, speech perception in noise and subjective satisfaction if compared to unilateral BCI fitting in patients affected by unilateral conductive hearing impairment. This may be explained by the different individual transcranial attenuation of each subject, which might lead to different outcomes in terms of binaural hearing achievement. On the other hand, patients with unilateral conductive or mixed hearing loss fitted with monaural BCI achieved good results in terms of binaural hearing and for this reason, there is no absolute contraindication to implantation in those patients. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Middle Ear and Bone Conduction Implants)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Research, Other

15 pages, 318 KiB  
Review
Single-Sided Deafness and Hearing Rehabilitation Modalities: Contralateral Routing of Signal Devices, Bone Conduction Devices, and Cochlear Implants
by Alessandra Pantaleo, Alessandra Murri, Giada Cavallaro, Vito Pontillo, Debora Auricchio and Nicola Quaranta
Brain Sci. 2024, 14(1), 99; https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci14010099 - 20 Jan 2024
Viewed by 1899
Abstract
Single sided deafness (SSD) is characterized by significant sensorineural hearing loss, severe or profound, in only one ear. SSD adversely affects various aspects of auditory perception, including causing impairment in sound localization, difficulties with speech comprehension in noisy environments, and decreased spatial awareness, [...] Read more.
Single sided deafness (SSD) is characterized by significant sensorineural hearing loss, severe or profound, in only one ear. SSD adversely affects various aspects of auditory perception, including causing impairment in sound localization, difficulties with speech comprehension in noisy environments, and decreased spatial awareness, resulting in a significant decline in overall quality of life (QoL). Several treatment options are available for SSD, including cochlear implants (CI), contralateral routing of signal (CROS), and bone conduction devices (BCD). The lack of consensus on outcome domains and measurement tools complicates treatment comparisons and decision-making. This narrative overview aims to summarize the treatment options available for SSD in adult and pediatric populations, discussing their respective advantages and disadvantages. Rerouting devices (CROS and BCD) attenuate the effects of head shadow and improve sound awareness and signal-to-noise ratio in the affected ear; however, they cannot restore binaural hearing. CROS devices, being non-implantable, are the least invasive option. Cochlear implantation is the only strategy that can restore binaural hearing, delivering significant improvements in speech perception, spatial localization, tinnitus control, and overall QoL. Comprehensive preoperative counseling, including a discussion of alternative technologies, implications of no treatment, expectations, and auditory training, is critical to optimizing therapeutic outcomes. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Middle Ear and Bone Conduction Implants)

Other

Jump to: Research, Review

16 pages, 689 KiB  
Systematic Review
Extrusion and Dislocation in Titanium Middle Ear Prostheses: A Literature Review
by Pietro Canzi, Elena Carlotto, Luca Bruschini, Domenico Minervini, Mario Mosconi, Laura Caliogna, Ilaria Ottoboni, Cesare Chiapperini, Francesco Lazzerini, Francesca Forli, Stefano Berrettini and Marco Benazzo
Brain Sci. 2023, 13(10), 1476; https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci13101476 - 19 Oct 2023
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1279
Abstract
Titanium middle ear (ME) prostheses are widely used in surgical practice due to their acoustic properties. However, they present a significant drawback shared by all synthetic materials currently in use for ME reconstruction: they can be rejected by the organism of the host. [...] Read more.
Titanium middle ear (ME) prostheses are widely used in surgical practice due to their acoustic properties. However, they present a significant drawback shared by all synthetic materials currently in use for ME reconstruction: they can be rejected by the organism of the host. In this study, we aim to review the current literature on titanium partial ossicular replacement prostheses (PORPs) and total ossicular replacement prostheses (TORPs) extrusion and dislocation. Eighty articles were analysed after a full article review based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The most common indication for reconstruction was chronic otitis media with cholesteatoma. The average extrusion or dislocation rate was 5.2%, ranging from 0 to 35%. The average improvements in the air–bone gap were 12.1 dB (1.6 dB to 25.1 dB) and 13.8 (−0.5 dB to 22.7 dB) for the PORP and TORP groups, respectively. The data reported on this topic are highly variable, demonstrating that functional outcomes are difficult to predict in clinical practice. We believe that the current limitations could be overcome with technological developments, including bioengineering research focused on promoting prosthesis adaptation to the ME environment. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Middle Ear and Bone Conduction Implants)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-4
Back to TopTop