Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-nptnm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-10-03T06:19:40.890Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The British experience of an implantable, subcutaneous bone conduction hearing aid (Xomed Audiant)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 June 2007

G. G. Browning
G. G. Browning*
Affiliation:
Glasgow
*
Professor George G. Browning, Department of Otolaryngology, Royal Infirmary, Glasgow G4 OSF
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Implantable bone conduction aids are potentially an important advance for those with a conductive hearing impairment. One system (Xomed Audiant bone conductor), which uses electromagnetic induction to vibrate a subcutaneous implanted skull magnet, has now been implanted in sufficient patients in the United Kingdom, for enough time, for its indicationsto be evaluated.

Seventeen of the total of 18 patients that have been implanted, satisfied the average threshold criterion for suitability for implantation (average bone conduction over 0.5, 1 and 2 kHz of 25 dB HL or better) yet only 10 of the 17 (59 per cent) currently use their Audiant aid. This was not because of technical reasons but was mainly influenced by the previous type of amplification. Current usage of a body level processor was 100 per cent) (6 of 6) in those that previously could only use a conventional bone conduction aid because of bilateral congenital or acquired atresia of their external auditory canals. In comparison, usage was only 36 per cent (4 of 11) in those that could potentially use a conventional ear level aid albeit with problems such as the discharge from active chronic otitis media. This relative non-use was considered due to a lack of power of the ear level processor and the general unwillingness of patients to change from an ear level to a body level device.

Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 104 , Issue 7 , July 1990 , pp. 534 - 538
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 1990

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.)

References

Carlin, W. V., Browning, G. G. (1990) Relative benefit from hearing aids in conductive and sensorineural hearing impairments. Clinical Otolaryngology, 15: 63–68.Google Scholar
Gatehouse, S., Browning, G. G. (1989) Output and distortion levels from an implanted bone conduction prosthesis. Clinical Otolaryngology. In Press.Google Scholar
Gates, G. A., Hough, J., Gatti, W. M., Bradley, W. H. (1989) The safety and effectiveness of an implanted electromagnetic hearing device. Archives of Otolaryngology, Head & Neck Surgery, 115: 924–930.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hough, J, McGee, M., Hemelick, T, Vernon, J. (1986). The surgical technique for implantation of the temporal bone stimulator (Audiant ABC). American Journal of Otolaryngology, 7: 315–321.Google ScholarPubMed
Hough, J., Vernon, J., Meikel, M., Humelick, T., Richard, G., Dormer, K. (1987) A middle ear implantable device for controlled amplification of sound in the human: a preliminary report. Laryngoscope, 97: 141–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wade, P. S., Tollos, S. K., Naiberg, J. (1989) Clinical experience with the Xomed Audiant osteointegrated bone conduction hearing device: a preliminary report of seven cases. Journal of Otolaryngology, 18: 79–84.Google ScholarPubMed