Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-45ctf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-19T04:06:43.675Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Vibroplasty involving direct coupling of the floating mass transducer to the oval window niche

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 April 2010

T Zehlicke ,
R Dahl ,
T Just  and
H-W Pau
T Zehlicke
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Military Hospital, Hamburg, Germany Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Rostock, Germany
R Dahl
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Rostock, Germany
T Just
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Rostock, Germany
H-W Pau*
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Rostock, Germany
*
Address for correspondence: Dr Hans-Wilhelm Pau, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Rostock, Doberaner Strasse 137–139, 18057 Rostock, Germany. Phone: ++49 (0)381 4948301 Fax: ++49 (0)381 4948302 E-mail: hans-wilhelm.pau@med.uni-rostock.de
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

To demonstrate the technique and clinical application of vibroplasty in which the floating mass transducer component of the Vibrant Soundbridge implant is coupled directly to the oval window niche, in patients with a mobile stapes footplate but a malformed or destroyed stapes suprastructure.

Methods:

The underlying concept was to create a soft tissue casing for the floating mass transducer, while also firmly connecting the transducer to a small, solid cartilage ‘plunger’ attached to the stapes footplate. This was realised by removing almost all the cartilage from a larger piece of cartilage–perichondrium, leaving only a tiny cartilage island about half a millimetre in diameter, attached to a much wider ‘blanket’ of perichondrium.

Results:

By coupling the floating mass transducer directly to the oval window niche, patients' speech understanding was improved. Post-operative aided thresholds of 30–40 dB HL were achieved by all patients.

Conclusions:

In patients with mixed hearing loss combined with a destroyed stapes suprastructure but a mobile stapes footplate, we describe the coupling of the floating mass transducer component of a Vibrant Soundbridge to the stapes footplate, as an alternative to coupling to the round window.

Keywords

Implants And ProsthesesMiddle EarFloating mass transducerDeafness

Information

Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 124 , Issue 7 , July 2010 , pp. 716 - 719
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1Lenarz, T, Weber, BP, Mack, KF, Battmer, RD, Gnadeberg, D. The Vibrant Soundbridge system: a new kind of hearing aid for sensorineural hearing loss. 1: Function and initial clinical experiences [in German]. Laryngorhinootologie 1998;77:247–55CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2Wollenberg, B, Beltrame, M, Schonweiler, R, Gehrking, E, Nitsch, S, Steffen, A et al. Integration of the active middle ear implant Vibrant Soundbridge in total auricular reconstruction [in German]. HNO 2007;55:349–56CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3Frenzel, H, Hanke, F, Beltrame, M, Steffen, A, Schonweiler, R, Wollenberg, B. Application of the Vibrant Soundbridge to unilateral osseous atresia cases. Laryngoscope 2009;119:67–74CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4Cremers, CW, Verhaegen, VJ, Snik, AF. The floating mass transducer of the Vibrant Soundbridge interposed between the stapes and tympanic membrane after incus necrosis. Otol Neurotol 2009;30:76–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5Huber, AM, Ball, GR, Veraguth, D, Dillier, N, Bodmer, D, Sequeira, D. A new implantable middle ear hearing device for mixed hearing loss: a feasibility study in human temporal bones. Otol Neurotol 2006;27:1104–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6Hüttenbrink, KB, Zahnert, T, Bornitz, M, Beutner, D. TORP-vibroplasty: a new alternative for the chronically disabled middle ear. Otol Neurotol 2008;29:965–71CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7Venail, F, Lavieille, JP, Meller, R, Deveze, A, Tardivet, L, Magnan, J. New perspectives for middle ear implants: first results in otosclerosis with mixed hearing loss. Laryngoscope 2007;117:552–5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8Dumon, T. Vibrant soundbridge middle ear implant in otosclerosis: technique – indication. Adv Otorhinolaryngol 2007;65:320–2Google ScholarPubMed
9Colletti, V, Soli, SD, Carner, M, Colletti, L. Treatment of mixed hearing losses via implantation of a vibratory transducer on the round window. Int J Audiol 2006;45:600–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10Colletti, V, Carner, M, Colletti, L. TORP vs round window implant for hearing restoration of patients with extensive ossicular chain defect. Acta Otolaryngol 2009;129:449–52CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11Beltrame, AM, Martini, A, Prosser, S, Giarbini, N, Streitberger, C. Coupling the Vibrant Soundbridge to cochlea round window: auditory results in patients with mixed hearing loss. Otol Neurotol 2009;30:194–201CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12Linder, T, Schlegel, C, DeMin, N, van der Westhuizen, S. Active middle ear implants in patients undergoing subtotal petrosectomy: new application for the Vibrant Soundbridge device and its implication for lateral cranium base surgery. Otol Neurotol 2009;30:41–7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13Kiefer, J, Arnold, W, Staudenmaier, R. Round window stimulation with an implantable hearing aid (Soundbridge) combined with autogenous reconstruction of the auricle – a new approach. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec 2006;68:378–85CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14Fisch, U, Cremers, CW, Lenarz, T, Weber, B, Babighian, G, Uziel, AS et al. Clinical experience with the Vibrant Soundbridge implant device. Otol Neurotol 2001;22:962–72CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15Montag, M, Settevendemie, C, Helbig, S. Attachment of the Vibrant Soundbridge middle ear prosthesis on the cochlear endost – alternative solution at anatomical variance. In: Pau, HW, ed. 80th Congress of the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology – Head and Neck Surgery. Rostock: Rheinware Verlag, 2009:109Google Scholar
16Pau, HW, Just, T, Bornitz, M, Lasurashvilli, N, Zahnert, T. Noise exposure of the inner ear during drilling a cochleostomy for cochlear implantation. Laryngoscope 2007;117:535–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar