Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-20T05:56:33.210Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Soft tissue overgrowth in bone-anchored hearing aid patients: use of 8.5 mm abutment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2011

S Pelosi  and
S S Chandrasekhar
S Pelosi
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, The Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, USA
S S Chandrasekhar*
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, The Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, USA New York Otology, New York, USA
*
Address for correspondence: Dr Sujana S. Chandrasekhar, New York Otology, 364 East 69th Street, New York, NY 10021 Fax: +212-249-3287 E-mail: newyorkotology@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

To review outcomes following implantation of an 8.5 mm bone-anchored hearing aid abutment, as regards post-operative management of scalp soft tissue overgrowth.

Study design:

Retrospective chart review of paediatric and adult patients implanted with bone-anchored hearing aids between 2003 and 2008 who subsequently underwent revision surgery for excessive soft tissue growth.

Setting:

A tertiary referral centre and a private otology and neurotology clinic.

Subjects:

A total of 80 patients underwent bone-anchored hearing aid placement between 2003 and 2008. Of these patients, 14 had significant scalp soft tissue overgrowth unresponsive to first-line, nonsurgical local wound care.

Results:

Fourteen patients underwent an average of 2.1 surgical procedures each for soft tissue overgrowth around their bone-anchored hearing aid abutment. The mean time between initial implantation and revision surgery was 13.6 months. Of these 14 patients, 11 were eventually fitted with an 8.5 mm abutment. Following placement of the longer abutment, only one patient required additional surgical reduction of soft tissue overgrowth (mean follow-up time 11.8 months). All patients were able to use their bone-anchored hearing aid.

Conclusion:

The 8.5 mm bone-anchored hearing aid abutment is successful in preventing the need for additional surgical intervention in the small but significant number of patients with post-implantation soft tissue overgrowth. Early consideration should be given to this option when first-line soft tissue care is inadequate.

Keywords

Hearing AidsOsseo-integrationPostoperative Complications
Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 125 , Issue 6 , June 2011 , pp. 576 - 579
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 2011

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

1Shirazi, MA, Marzo, SJ, Leonetti, JP. Perioperative complications with the bone-anchored hearing aid. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2006;134:236–9Google Scholar
2Tjellstro, MA, Granstro, MG. How we do it: frequency of skin necrosis after BAHA surgery. Clin Otolaryngol 2006;31:216–20Google Scholar
3House, JW, Kutz, JW. Bone-anchored hearing aids: incidence and management of postoperative complications Otol Neurotol 2007;28:213–17CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4Wazen, JJ, Young, DL, Farrugia, MC, Chandrasekhar, SS, Ghossaini, SN, Borik, J et al. Successes and complications of the BAHA system. Otol Neurotol 2009;29:1115–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5Gillett, D, Fairley, JW, Chandrashaker, TS, Bean, A, Gonzalez, J. Bone-anchored hearing aids: results of the first eight years of a programme in a district general hospital. J Laryngol Otol 2006;120:537–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6Holgers, KM, Tjellstrom, A, Bjursten, LM, Erlandsson, BE. Soft tissue reactions around percutaneous implants: a clinical study of soft tissue conditions around skin-penetrating titanium implants for bone-anchored hearing aids. Am J Otol 1988;9:56–9Google ScholarPubMed
7Monksfield, P, Ho, EC, Reid, A, Proops, D. Experience with the longer (8.5 mm) abutment for bone-anchored hearing aid. Otol Neurotol 2009;30:274–6Google Scholar
8Bonding, P. Titanium implants for bone-anchored hearing aids — host reaction. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl 2000;543:105–7Google Scholar
9Berliner, KI, Luxford, WM, House, WF. Cochlear implants: 1981 to 1985. Am J Otol 1985;6:173–86Google ScholarPubMed
10Berenholz, LP, Burkey, JM, Lippy, WH. High body mass index as a risk factor for skin overgrowth with the bone-anchored hearing aid. Otol Neurotol 2010;31:430–2CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11Wolfram, D, Tzankov, A, Pulzl, P, Piza-Katzer, H. Hypertrophic scars and keloids: a review of their pathophysiology, risk factors, and therapeutic management. Dermatol Surg 2009;35:171–81Google Scholar