Benefits of active middle ear implants in mixed hearing loss: Stapes versus round window

Jeon Mi Lee, Jinsei Jung, InSeok Moon, Sung Huhn Kim, Jae Young Choi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives/Hypothesis: We compared the audiologic benefits of active middle ear implants with those of passive middle ear implants with hearing aids in mixed hearing loss, and also compared the outcomes of stapes vibroplasty with those of round window vibroplasty. Study Design: Retrospective chart review. Methods: Thirty-four patients with mixed hearing loss due to chronic otitis media were treated with a middle ear implant. Of these, 15 were treated with a passive middle ear implant (conventional ossiculoplasty with a partial ossicular replacement prosthesis), nine with an active middle ear implant coupling to the stapes, and 10 with an active middle ear implant coupling to the round window. Patients underwent pure-tone/free-field audiograms and speech discrimination tests before surgery and 6 months after surgery, and the results of these tests were compared. Results: The active middle ear implant resulted in better outcomes than the passive middle ear implant with hearing aids at mid to high frequencies (P <.05). Patients who received either a stapes vibroplasty or a round window vibroplasty showed comparable hearing gain except at 8,000 Hz (48.9 dB vs. 31.0 dB, P <.05). Patients who received a stapes vibroplasty showed an improvement even in bone conduction at 1,000 Hz and 2,000 Hz (both P <.05). Conclusions: Active middle ear implantation could be a better option than treatment with passive middle ear implants with hearing aids for achieving rehabilitation in patients with mixed hearing loss. Vibroplasty via either oval window or round window stimulation shares similar good results. Level of Evidence: 4 Laryngoscope, 127:1435–1441, 2017.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1435-1441
Number of pages7
JournalLaryngoscope
Volume127
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017 Jun 1

Fingerprint

Mixed Conductive-Sensorineural Hearing Loss
Ossicular Prosthesis
Stapes
Hearing Aids
Speech Discrimination Tests
Bone Conduction
Laryngoscopes
Otitis Media
Middle Ear
Hearing
Rehabilitation
Retrospective Studies

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Otorhinolaryngology

Cite this

Lee, Jeon Mi ; Jung, Jinsei ; Moon, InSeok ; Kim, Sung Huhn ; Choi, Jae Young. / Benefits of active middle ear implants in mixed hearing loss : Stapes versus round window. In: Laryngoscope. 2017 ; Vol. 127, No. 6. pp. 1435-1441.
@article{5d2b29d981e0470b878cb09f0bbc6449,
title = "Benefits of active middle ear implants in mixed hearing loss: Stapes versus round window",
abstract = "Objectives/Hypothesis: We compared the audiologic benefits of active middle ear implants with those of passive middle ear implants with hearing aids in mixed hearing loss, and also compared the outcomes of stapes vibroplasty with those of round window vibroplasty. Study Design: Retrospective chart review. Methods: Thirty-four patients with mixed hearing loss due to chronic otitis media were treated with a middle ear implant. Of these, 15 were treated with a passive middle ear implant (conventional ossiculoplasty with a partial ossicular replacement prosthesis), nine with an active middle ear implant coupling to the stapes, and 10 with an active middle ear implant coupling to the round window. Patients underwent pure-tone/free-field audiograms and speech discrimination tests before surgery and 6 months after surgery, and the results of these tests were compared. Results: The active middle ear implant resulted in better outcomes than the passive middle ear implant with hearing aids at mid to high frequencies (P <.05). Patients who received either a stapes vibroplasty or a round window vibroplasty showed comparable hearing gain except at 8,000 Hz (48.9 dB vs. 31.0 dB, P <.05). Patients who received a stapes vibroplasty showed an improvement even in bone conduction at 1,000 Hz and 2,000 Hz (both P <.05). Conclusions: Active middle ear implantation could be a better option than treatment with passive middle ear implants with hearing aids for achieving rehabilitation in patients with mixed hearing loss. Vibroplasty via either oval window or round window stimulation shares similar good results. Level of Evidence: 4 Laryngoscope, 127:1435–1441, 2017.",
author = "Lee, {Jeon Mi} and Jinsei Jung and InSeok Moon and Kim, {Sung Huhn} and Choi, {Jae Young}",
year = "2017",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/lary.26244",
language = "English",
volume = "127",
pages = "1435--1441",
journal = "Laryngoscope",
issn = "0023-852X",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Inc.",
number = "6",

}

Benefits of active middle ear implants in mixed hearing loss : Stapes versus round window. / Lee, Jeon Mi; Jung, Jinsei; Moon, InSeok; Kim, Sung Huhn; Choi, Jae Young.

In: Laryngoscope, Vol. 127, No. 6, 01.06.2017, p. 1435-1441.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Benefits of active middle ear implants in mixed hearing loss

T2 - Stapes versus round window

AU - Lee, Jeon Mi

AU - Jung, Jinsei

AU - Moon, InSeok

AU - Kim, Sung Huhn

AU - Choi, Jae Young

PY - 2017/6/1

Y1 - 2017/6/1

N2 - Objectives/Hypothesis: We compared the audiologic benefits of active middle ear implants with those of passive middle ear implants with hearing aids in mixed hearing loss, and also compared the outcomes of stapes vibroplasty with those of round window vibroplasty. Study Design: Retrospective chart review. Methods: Thirty-four patients with mixed hearing loss due to chronic otitis media were treated with a middle ear implant. Of these, 15 were treated with a passive middle ear implant (conventional ossiculoplasty with a partial ossicular replacement prosthesis), nine with an active middle ear implant coupling to the stapes, and 10 with an active middle ear implant coupling to the round window. Patients underwent pure-tone/free-field audiograms and speech discrimination tests before surgery and 6 months after surgery, and the results of these tests were compared. Results: The active middle ear implant resulted in better outcomes than the passive middle ear implant with hearing aids at mid to high frequencies (P <.05). Patients who received either a stapes vibroplasty or a round window vibroplasty showed comparable hearing gain except at 8,000 Hz (48.9 dB vs. 31.0 dB, P <.05). Patients who received a stapes vibroplasty showed an improvement even in bone conduction at 1,000 Hz and 2,000 Hz (both P <.05). Conclusions: Active middle ear implantation could be a better option than treatment with passive middle ear implants with hearing aids for achieving rehabilitation in patients with mixed hearing loss. Vibroplasty via either oval window or round window stimulation shares similar good results. Level of Evidence: 4 Laryngoscope, 127:1435–1441, 2017.

AB - Objectives/Hypothesis: We compared the audiologic benefits of active middle ear implants with those of passive middle ear implants with hearing aids in mixed hearing loss, and also compared the outcomes of stapes vibroplasty with those of round window vibroplasty. Study Design: Retrospective chart review. Methods: Thirty-four patients with mixed hearing loss due to chronic otitis media were treated with a middle ear implant. Of these, 15 were treated with a passive middle ear implant (conventional ossiculoplasty with a partial ossicular replacement prosthesis), nine with an active middle ear implant coupling to the stapes, and 10 with an active middle ear implant coupling to the round window. Patients underwent pure-tone/free-field audiograms and speech discrimination tests before surgery and 6 months after surgery, and the results of these tests were compared. Results: The active middle ear implant resulted in better outcomes than the passive middle ear implant with hearing aids at mid to high frequencies (P <.05). Patients who received either a stapes vibroplasty or a round window vibroplasty showed comparable hearing gain except at 8,000 Hz (48.9 dB vs. 31.0 dB, P <.05). Patients who received a stapes vibroplasty showed an improvement even in bone conduction at 1,000 Hz and 2,000 Hz (both P <.05). Conclusions: Active middle ear implantation could be a better option than treatment with passive middle ear implants with hearing aids for achieving rehabilitation in patients with mixed hearing loss. Vibroplasty via either oval window or round window stimulation shares similar good results. Level of Evidence: 4 Laryngoscope, 127:1435–1441, 2017.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84997531210&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84997531210&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/lary.26244

DO - 10.1002/lary.26244

M3 - Article

C2 - 27560038

AN - SCOPUS:84997531210

VL - 127

SP - 1435

EP - 1441

JO - Laryngoscope

JF - Laryngoscope

SN - 0023-852X

IS - 6

ER -