Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-l4t7p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-19T04:42:38.569Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Surgical and audiological evaluation of the Baha BA400

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 January 2015

M Iseri ,
K S Orhan ,
M H Yarıktaş ,
A Kara ,
M Durgut ,
D S Ceylan ,
Y Guldiken ,
I G Keskin  and
K Değer
M Iseri
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Kocaeli University Medical Faculty, Kocaeli, Turkey
K S Orhan
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, Isparta, Turkey
M H Yarıktaş
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Suleyman Demirel University Medical Faculty, Isparta, Turkey
A Kara*
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Kocaeli University Medical Faculty, Kocaeli, Turkey
M Durgut
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Kocaeli University Medical Faculty, Kocaeli, Turkey
D S Ceylan
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, Isparta, Turkey
Y Guldiken
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, Isparta, Turkey
I G Keskin
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Kocaeli University Medical Faculty, Kocaeli, Turkey
K Değer
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, Isparta, Turkey
*
Address for correspondence: Dr A Kara, Kocaeli Universitesi Tip Fakultesi, KBB Anabilim Dali, 41380 Umuttepe, Kocaeli, Turkey Fax: +90 262 3037003 E-mail: doktor.kbb@hotmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

Despite extensive soft tissue reduction, the most common complications associated with bone-anchored hearing aid systems, also known as bone-anchored hearing implants, are related to adverse skin reactions around the abutment. The necessary soft tissue reduction also adds complexity to the surgical procedure. This study aimed to evaluate the surgical and audiological outcomes of a new connective interface of the Cochlear™ Baha® BA400 device implanted using the one-stage surgical technique.

Method:

A multicentre, retrospective case series is presented, including data collected from three tertiary care institutions.

Results:

In total, 16 patients who had undergone bone-anchored hearing aid surgery over a 10- to 12-month period were assessed for hearing performance, implant stability and surgical complications.

Conclusion:

This case series indicates that new abutments with a hydroxyapatite coating can be implanted percutaneously without soft tissue reduction. Furthermore, device implantation using this surgical technique may have some advantages compared with a conventional device and procedure combination over 12- to 16-months of follow up.

Keywords

Hearing AidsHydroxyapatitesSkinBone Conduction

Information

Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 129 , Issue 1 , January 2015 , pp. 32 - 37
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 2015 

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

Footnotes

Presented as a poster at the 4th International Symposium on Bone Conducting Hearing – Craniofacial Osseointegration, 6–8 June 2013, Newcastle, UK

References

1de Wolf, MJ, Hol, MK, Huygen, PL, Mylanus, EA, Cremers, CW. Clinical outcome of the simplified surgical technique for BAHA implantation. Otol Neurotol 2008;29:1100–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2Dun, CA, Faber, HT, de Wolf, MJ, Mylanus, EA, Cremers, CW, Hol, MK. Assessment of more than 1,000 implanted percutaneous bone conduction devices: skin reactions and implant survival. Otol Neurotol 2012;33:192–8Google Scholar
3Gottlow, J, Sennerby, L, Rosengren, A, Flynn, M. An experimental evaluation of a new craniofacial implant using the rabbit tibia model: part I. Histologic findings. Otol Neurotol 2010;31:832–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4Sennerby, L, Gottlow, J, Rosengren, A, Flynn, M. An experimental evaluation of a new craniofacial implant using the rabbit tibia model: Part II. Biomechanical findings. Otol Neurotol 2010;31:840–5Google Scholar
5Larsson, A, Wigren, S, Andersson, M, Ekeroth, G, Flynn, M, Nannmark, U. Histologic evaluation of soft tissue integration of experimental abutments for bone anchored hearing implants using surgery without soft tissue reduction. Otol Neurotol 2012;33:1445–51Google Scholar
6Hultcrantz, M. Outcome of the bone-anchored hearing aid procedure without skin thinning: a prospective clinical trial. Otol Neurotol 2011;32:1134–9Google Scholar
7Tjellström, A, Lindström, J, Hallén, O, Albrektsson, T, Brånemark, PI. Osseointegrated titanium implants in the temporal bone. A clinical study on bone-anchored hearing aids. Am J Otol 1981;2:304–10Google ScholarPubMed
8Tjellström, A, Granström, G. One-stage procedure to establish osseointegration: a zero to five years follow-up report. J Laryngol Otol 1995;109:593–8Google Scholar
9Stalfors, J, Tjellström, A. Skin reactions after BAHA surgery: a comparison between the U-graft technique and the BAHA dermatome. Otol Neurotol 2008;29:1109–14CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10Bovo, R. Simplified technique without skin flap for the bone-anchored hearing aid (BAHA) implant. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital 2008;28:252–5Google Scholar
11Granström, G. Craniofacial osseointegration. Oral Dis 2007;13:261–9Google Scholar
12Wazen, JJ, Young, DL, Farrugia, MC, Chandrasekhar, SS, Ghossaini, SN, Borik, J et al. Successes and complications of the Baha system. Otol Neurotol 2008;29:1115–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13D'Eredità, R, Caroncini, M, Saetti, R. The new Baha implant: a prospective osseointegration study. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2012;146:979–83Google Scholar
14Liepert, DR, DiToppa, JC. The Nobelpharma auditory system bone-anchored hearing aid: the Edmonton experience. J Otolaryngol 1994;23:411–8.Google ScholarPubMed
15de Wolf, MJ, Hendrix, S, Cremers, CW, Snik, AF.Better performance with bone-anchored hearing aid than acoustic devices in patients with severe air-bone gap. Laryngoscope 2011;121:613–6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed