Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-bp2c4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-18T21:30:03.509Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Outcomes of implantation and willingness of BAHA candidates to undergo BAHA implantation

Presenting Author: Michal Luntz

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 June 2016

Michal Luntz ,
Amjad Tubia ,
Riad Khnifes ,
Amit Wolfowitz ,
Talma Shpak  and
Noam Yehudai
Michal Luntz
Affiliation:
Bnai Zion Medical Center, Technion – The Bruce Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Haifa, Israel
Amjad Tubia
Affiliation:
Bnai Zion Medical Center, Technion – The Bruce Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Haifa, Israel
Riad Khnifes
Affiliation:
Bnai Zion Medical Center, Technion – The Bruce Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Haifa, Israel
Amit Wolfowitz
Affiliation:
Bnai Zion Medical Center, Technion – The Bruce Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Haifa, Israel
Talma Shpak
Affiliation:
Bnai Zion Medical Center, Technion – The Bruce Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Haifa, Israel
Noam Yehudai
Affiliation:
Bnai Zion Medical Center, Technion – The Bruce Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Haifa, Israel
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Learning Objectives: To evaluate hearing and medical outcomes with contemporary BAHA implants as well as willingness of BAHA candidates who suffer from chronic otitis media to undergo BAHA implantation.

Introduction: Osseo-integrated bone-anchored hearing implants are used in patients with conductive/mixed complex hearing loss, when other rehabilitation alternatives are not feasible.

Methods: The study included two groups of patients: 62 candidates with COM who were referred for BAHA during 2012–2015 and 34 BAHA implantees. Information in the first group was collected regarding the willingness of these individuals to receive a BAHA implant. In the second group, hearing thresholds before and after implantation were analyzed and patients were asked to complete a questionnaire regarding their habitual daily use of the system and medical issues related to the implant.

Results: Out of 62 BAHA candidates, only 21 (34%) decided on BAHA surgery. Of the 34 BAHA implantees, 30 (88%) are using their devices. Recurrent local infection surrounding the abutment have led 4 patients with older generation BAHA connect to stop using their device, and two of them had it surgically removed. The other two are scheduled for replacement to a BAHA attract device. Hearing outcomes with BAHA implants mirror bone conduction thresholds in the BAHA Connect group and are slightly below bone conduction thresholds in the BAHA Attract group. Pre-implantation thresholds with the BAHA Soft Band predict post-implantation BAHA Connect as well as BAHA Attract thresholds.

Conclusions: Hearing outcomes with BAHA implants are good and predictable. The only reason for non-use is medical issues concerning the abutment in older generations BAHA Connect systems. Despite excellent experience among BAHA users and professionals, these technologies are still under-utilized, even in those for whom BAHA is the only hearing solution.