Results of Active Middle Ear Implantation in Patients With Mixed Hearing Loss After Middle Ear Surgery: A Prospective Multicenter Study (the ROMEO Study)
2
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Objectives. This study was conducted to evaluate the user satisfaction, efficacy, and safety of round window (RW) vibroplasty using the Vibrant Soundbridge (VSB) in patients with persistent mixed hearing loss after mastoidectomy. Methods. The study included 27 patients (mean age, 58.7 years; age range, 28–76 years; 11 men and 16 women) with mixed hearing loss after mastoidectomy from 15 tertiary referral centers in Korea. The VSB was implanted at the RW. The Korean translation of the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) questionnaire and the Korean version of the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (K-IOI-HA) questionnaire were used to evaluate user satisfaction as the primary outcome. The secondary outcome measures were audiological test results and complication rates. Results. The mean scores for ease of communication (61.3% to 29.7% to 30.2%), reverberation (62.1% to 43.1% to 37.4%), and background noise (63.3% to 37.7% to 34.3%) subscales of the APHAB questionnaire significantly decreased after VSB surgery. The mean K-IOI-HA scores at 3 and 6 months after surgery were significantly higher than the mean preoperative score (18.6 to 27.2 to 28.1). The postoperative VSB-aided thresholds were significantly lower than the preoperative unaided and hearing aid (HA)-aided thresholds. There was no significant difference between preoperative unaided, preoperative HA-aided, and postoperative VSB-aided maximum phonetically balanced word-recognition scores. None of the 27 patients experienced a change in postoperative bone conduction pure tone average. One patient developed temporary facial palsy and two developed surgical wound infections. Conclusion. RW vibroplasty resulted in improved satisfaction and audiological test results in patients with mixed hearing loss after mastoidectomy, and the complication rate was tolerable.
Abstract
Objectives. This study was conducted to evaluate the user satisfaction, efficacy, and safety of round window (RW) vibroplasty using the Vibrant Soundbridge (VSB) in patients with persistent mixed hearing loss after mastoidectomy. Methods. The study included 27 patients (mean age, 58.7 years; age range, 28–76 years; 11 men and 16 women) with mixed hearing loss after mastoidectomy from 15 tertiary referral centers in Korea. The VSB was implanted at the RW. The Korean translation of the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) questionnaire and the Korean version of the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (K-IOI-HA) questionnaire were used to evaluate user satisfaction as the primary outcome. The secondary outcome measures were audiological test results and complication rates. Results. The mean scores for ease of communication (61.3% to 29.7% to 30.2%), reverberation (62.1% to 43.1% to 37.4%), and background noise (63.3% to 37.7% to 34.3%) subscales of the APHAB questionnaire significantly decreased after VSB surgery. The mean K-IOI-HA scores at 3 and 6 months after surgery were significantly higher than the mean preoperative score (18.6 to 27.2 to 28.1). The postoperative VSB-aided thresholds were significantly lower than the preoperative unaided and hearing aid (HA)-aided thresholds. There was no significant difference between preoperative unaided, preoperative HA-aided, and postoperative VSB-aided maximum phonetically balanced word-recognition scores. None of the 27 patients experienced a change in postoperative bone conduction pure tone average. One patient developed temporary facial palsy and two developed surgical wound infections. Conclusion. RW vibroplasty resulted in improved satisfaction and audiological test results in patients with mixed hearing loss after mastoidectomy, and the complication rate was tolerable.
참고문헌 (25)
- Cristobal F, "Hearing results in the second stage of open mastoidectomy : a comparison of the different techniques", Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 122(5), pp.748~751 (2000)
- Galm T, "Open and closed cavity mastoid operations : comparing early hearing results", Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol, 270(1), pp.77~80 (2013)
- Cox MD, "Long-term hearing results after ossiculoplasty", Otol Neurotol, 38(4), pp.510~515 (2017)
- Geerse S, "Hearing and hearing rehabilitation after obliteration of troublesome mastoid cavities", Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol, 277(12), pp.3307~3313 (2020)
- Gluth MB, "Hearing aid tolerance after revision and obliteration of canal wall down mastoidectomy cavities", Otol Neurotol, 34(4), pp.711~714 (2013)
- Maw J, "The Vibrant Soundbridge : a global overview", Otolaryngol Clin North Am, 52(2), pp.285~295 (2019)
- Zahnert T, "Long-term outcomes of vibroplasty coupler implantations to treat mixed", conductive hearing loss, 2018, pp.23(6), 316~325
- Butler CL, "Efficacy of the active middle-ear implant in patients with sensorineural hearing loss", J Laryngol Otol, 127(Suppl 2), pp.S8~S16 (2013)
- Lee JM, "Benefits of active middle ear implants in mixed hearing loss : stapes versus round window", Laryngoscope, 127(6), pp.1435~1441 (2017)
- Ernst A, "Safety and effectiveness of the Vibrant Soundbridge in treating conductive and mixed hearing loss : a systematic review", Laryngoscope, 126(6), pp.1451~1457 (2016)
- 추호석, "한국어판 International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids(IOI-HA)의 표준화: 타당도 및 신뢰도 검증", 대한이비인후-두경부외과학회지, 55(1), pp.20~25 (2012), 대한이비인후과학회
- 임현정, "한국어판 Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit의 타당도 및 신뢰도 검증", 대한이비인후-두경부외과학회지, 60(4), pp.164~173 (2017), 대한이비인후과학회[DOI]
- Kumakawa K, "Multicenter clinical study of Vibrant Soundbridge in Japan : analysis of subjective questionnaires", Nihon Jibiinkoka Gakkai Kaiho, 118(11), pp.1309~1318 (2015)
- Dornhoffer JR, "Assessment of hearing aid benefit using patient-reported outcomes and audiologic measures", Audiol Neurootol, 25(4), pp.215~223 (2020)
- Atas A, "Vibrant SoundBridge application to middle ear windows versus conventional hearing aids : a comparative study based on international outcome inventory for hearing aids", Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol, 271(1), pp.35~40 (2014)
- Iwasaki S, "Round Window application of an active middle ear implant : a comparison with hearing aid usage in Japan", Otol Neurotol, 38(6), pp.e145~e151 (2017)
- Brkic FF, "Long-term outcome of hearing rehabilitation with an active middle ear implant", Laryngoscope, 129(2), pp.477~481 (2019)
- Schwab B, "Oval window membrane vibroplasty for direct acoustic cochlear stimulation : treating severe mixed hearing loss in challenging middle ears", Otol Neurotol, 33(5), pp.804~809 (2012)
- Bernardeschi D, "Functional results of Vibrant Soundbridge middle ear implants in conductive and mixed hearing losses", Audiol Neurootol, 16(6), pp.381~387 (2011)
- Truy E, "Vibrant Soundbridge versus conventional hearing aid in sensorineural high-frequency hearing loss : a prospective study", Otol Neurotol, 29(5), pp.684~687 (2008)
- Labassi S, "The Vibrant Soundbridge® middle ear implant : a historical overview", Cochlear Implants Int, 18(6), pp.314~323 (2017)
- Khan A, "Vibrant Soundbridge rehabilitation of sensorineural hearing loss", Otolaryngol Clin North Am, 47(6), pp.927~939 (2014)
- Zwartenkot JW, "Active middle ear implantation : long-term medical and technical follow-up, implant survival, and complications", Otol Neurotol, 37(5), pp.513~519 (2016)
- Barbara M, "Complications after round window vibroplasty", Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol, 276(6), pp.1601~1605 (2019)
- Schmuziger N, "Long-term assessment after implantation of the Vibrant Soundbridge device", Otol Neurotol, 27(2), pp.183~188 (2006)