Three-year audiological outcomes of the latest generation middle ear transducer (MET) implant
- PDF / 863,140 Bytes
- 7 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 48 Downloads / 155 Views
OTOLOGY
Three‑year audiological outcomes of the latest generation middle ear transducer (MET) implant Henryk Skarżyński1 · Beata Dziendziel2 · Elżbieta Włodarczyk1 · Piotr H. Skarżyński2,3,4 Received: 7 January 2020 / Accepted: 1 May 2020 © The Author(s) 2020
Abstract Purpose To evaluate the long-term audiological outcomes and safety of the latest generation of middle ear transducer (MET) among a group of Polish patients. Methods Ten patients aged 48–72 years with bilateral sensorineural hearing loss (n = 8) and mixed hearing loss (n = 2) were included in this study. Pure tone audiometry, sound thresholds, word recognition scores in quiet and speech reception thresholds in noise were assessed. Medical and technical complication information was gathered. Results All the patients underwent unilateral implantation with the latest generation Cochlear MET between 2014 and 2016. Mean length of follow-up was 3.7 years. Compared to the unaided condition, the implant provided significant functional gain (mean M = 26.1 dB) at 12 months follow-up. Compared to before surgery, average word recognition in quiet at 65 dB and at 80 dB SPL, as well as speech reception threshold in noise, were significantly better at 12 months. However, postoperative air conduction thresholds 6 months after implantation worsened by 10.3 dB (standard deviation SD = 5.8 dB). Postoperatively, three patients had skin problems around the processor, and one of them completely resigned from using the device 5 months after activation. Technical failures occurred in 4 cases. There were 9 out of 10 patients who still used the MET, but only 5 of them used the processor regularly (every day). Conclusion Despite changes in the transducer implemented by the manufacturer, we observed a significant number of adverse events in users of the latest generation of MET. Keywords Active middle ear implant · Middle ear transducer · Cochlear MET · Complications · Partial deafness treatment · Hearing loss
Introduction In dealing with sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL), conventional hearing aids (in-the-ear or behind-the-ear) are the first choice [1]. With significant technological progress, acoustic * Piotr H. Skarżyński [email protected] 1
Oto‑Rhino‑Laryngology Surgery Clinic, World Hearing Center, Institute of Physiology and Pathology of Hearing, Mokra 17, Warsaw/Kajetany 05‑830 Nadarzyn, Poland
2
Teleaudiology and Screening Department, World Hearing Center, Institute of Physiology and Pathology of Hearing, Mokra 17, Warsaw/Kajetany 08‑830 Nadarzyn, Poland
3
Heart Failure and Cardiac Rehabilitation Department, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
4
Institute of Sensory Organs, Warsaw/Kajetany, Poland
hearing aids (HAs) have developed a range of advantages, but there are still few group of patients who decline to use them or, for some reasons, are unable to use them. Specific areas of dissatisfaction include occlusion of the external ear canal, intolerance of earmolds (pain or itching), and poor sound
Data Loading...
