Two Different Percutaneous Bone-Anchored Hearing Aid Abutment Systems: Comparative Clinical Study
To compare two different percutaneous bone-anchored hearing aid (BAHA) abutment systems regarding operation time, scar healing, quality of life, implant stability, audiologic results, and complications. The study involves a prospective multi-center clinical evaluation. Thirty-two consecutive patient...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | The journal of international advanced otology 2016-04, Vol.12 (1), p.23-27 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 27 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 23 |
| container_title | The journal of international advanced otology |
| container_volume | 12 |
| creator | Polat, Beldan İşeri, Mete Orhan, Kadir Serkan Yılmazer, Ayça Başkadem Enver, Necati Ceylan, Didem Kara, Ahmet Güldiken, Yahya Çomoğlu, Şenol |
| description | To compare two different percutaneous bone-anchored hearing aid (BAHA) abutment systems regarding operation time, scar healing, quality of life, implant stability, audiologic results, and complications.
The study involves a prospective multi-center clinical evaluation. Thirty-two consecutive patients who had undergone BAHA surgery from January 2011 to January 2013 in two tertiary centers were included in the study. The Glasgow Inventory Benefit Score was used to assess the patients at least 6 months after surgery. The operation time and complications were recorded. Implant stability quotient (ISQ) values were recorded using resonance frequency analysis. Holger's classification was used to evaluate skin reactions.
The mean length of the operation was 39.2±4 min for standard abutment and 18.3±5.7 min for hydroxyapatite-coated abutment. ISQ scores were significantly better for standard abutment in all tests. The mean total Glasgow Inventory Benefit Score was 39.3±19 for the standard abutment and 46.3±24.5 for the hydroxyapatite-coated abutment groups, but there was no statistical significance between the two groups. There was no difference in audiological improvement between the two groups after surgery.
Hydroxyapatite-coated abutment provided a shorter operation time that was significantly different from standard abutment. There were no significant differences between standard abutment and hydroxyapatite-coated abutment regarding audiologic improvement, quality of life, loading time, and complications. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.5152/iao.2016.1998 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1800131031</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>4114263801</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-4ab4e0bc70231588209ccdfb86fc0bbb1ec39a64e9b9913f1472aaa76f0c53c63</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpd0EFP2zAUwHELbYKK9bjrZGmXXVL8bDe2d-vKBkhIIJWdI9t52YySuLMTUL89ico44Mu7_PT0_CfkM7DVGtb8Iti44gzKFRijT8iCg9SF0KA-kAUIpgtVSnNGljk_sumVXEkhT8kZV0Iyo_SC2IfnSC9D02DCfqD3mPw42B7jmOmP2GOx6f3fmLCm12hT6P_QTajpxo1DN_vdIQ_Y5e90G7u9TXYIT0i3beiDty3dDWN9-EQ-NrbNuHyd5-T3r58P2-vi9u7qZru5Lbwo2VBI6yQy5xXjAtZac2a8rxuny8Yz5xygF8aWEo0zBkQDUnFrrSob5tfCl-KcfDvu3af4b8Q8VF3IHtv2-JsKNGMggAmY6Nd39DGOqZ-um5UApQSfVXFUPsWcEzbVPoXOpkMFrJrzV1P-as5fzfkn_-V16-g6rN_0_9jiBcqpf-4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1803177321</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Two Different Percutaneous Bone-Anchored Hearing Aid Abutment Systems: Comparative Clinical Study</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><creator>Polat, Beldan ; İşeri, Mete ; Orhan, Kadir Serkan ; Yılmazer, Ayça Başkadem ; Enver, Necati ; Ceylan, Didem ; Kara, Ahmet ; Güldiken, Yahya ; Çomoğlu, Şenol</creator><creatorcontrib>Polat, Beldan ; İşeri, Mete ; Orhan, Kadir Serkan ; Yılmazer, Ayça Başkadem ; Enver, Necati ; Ceylan, Didem ; Kara, Ahmet ; Güldiken, Yahya ; Çomoğlu, Şenol</creatorcontrib><description>To compare two different percutaneous bone-anchored hearing aid (BAHA) abutment systems regarding operation time, scar healing, quality of life, implant stability, audiologic results, and complications.
The study involves a prospective multi-center clinical evaluation. Thirty-two consecutive patients who had undergone BAHA surgery from January 2011 to January 2013 in two tertiary centers were included in the study. The Glasgow Inventory Benefit Score was used to assess the patients at least 6 months after surgery. The operation time and complications were recorded. Implant stability quotient (ISQ) values were recorded using resonance frequency analysis. Holger's classification was used to evaluate skin reactions.
The mean length of the operation was 39.2±4 min for standard abutment and 18.3±5.7 min for hydroxyapatite-coated abutment. ISQ scores were significantly better for standard abutment in all tests. The mean total Glasgow Inventory Benefit Score was 39.3±19 for the standard abutment and 46.3±24.5 for the hydroxyapatite-coated abutment groups, but there was no statistical significance between the two groups. There was no difference in audiological improvement between the two groups after surgery.
Hydroxyapatite-coated abutment provided a shorter operation time that was significantly different from standard abutment. There were no significant differences between standard abutment and hydroxyapatite-coated abutment regarding audiologic improvement, quality of life, loading time, and complications.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1308-7649</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2148-3817</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.5152/iao.2016.1998</identifier><identifier>PMID: 27340978</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Turkey: Mediterranean Society for Otology and Audiology</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Aged ; Auditory Threshold ; Bone Conduction ; Child ; Durapatite ; Female ; Hearing Aids ; Hearing Loss - etiology ; Hearing Loss - rehabilitation ; Humans ; Male ; Operative Time ; Postoperative Complications - etiology ; Prospective Studies ; Prosthesis Design ; Suture Anchors ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>The journal of international advanced otology, 2016-04, Vol.12 (1), p.23-27</ispartof><rights>Copyright Mediterranean Society for Otology and Audiology Apr 2016</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-4ab4e0bc70231588209ccdfb86fc0bbb1ec39a64e9b9913f1472aaa76f0c53c63</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>315,782,786,866,27933,27934</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27340978$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Polat, Beldan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>İşeri, Mete</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Orhan, Kadir Serkan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yılmazer, Ayça Başkadem</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Enver, Necati</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ceylan, Didem</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kara, Ahmet</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Güldiken, Yahya</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Çomoğlu, Şenol</creatorcontrib><title>Two Different Percutaneous Bone-Anchored Hearing Aid Abutment Systems: Comparative Clinical Study</title><title>The journal of international advanced otology</title><addtitle>J Int Adv Otol</addtitle><description>To compare two different percutaneous bone-anchored hearing aid (BAHA) abutment systems regarding operation time, scar healing, quality of life, implant stability, audiologic results, and complications.
The study involves a prospective multi-center clinical evaluation. Thirty-two consecutive patients who had undergone BAHA surgery from January 2011 to January 2013 in two tertiary centers were included in the study. The Glasgow Inventory Benefit Score was used to assess the patients at least 6 months after surgery. The operation time and complications were recorded. Implant stability quotient (ISQ) values were recorded using resonance frequency analysis. Holger's classification was used to evaluate skin reactions.
The mean length of the operation was 39.2±4 min for standard abutment and 18.3±5.7 min for hydroxyapatite-coated abutment. ISQ scores were significantly better for standard abutment in all tests. The mean total Glasgow Inventory Benefit Score was 39.3±19 for the standard abutment and 46.3±24.5 for the hydroxyapatite-coated abutment groups, but there was no statistical significance between the two groups. There was no difference in audiological improvement between the two groups after surgery.
Hydroxyapatite-coated abutment provided a shorter operation time that was significantly different from standard abutment. There were no significant differences between standard abutment and hydroxyapatite-coated abutment regarding audiologic improvement, quality of life, loading time, and complications.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Auditory Threshold</subject><subject>Bone Conduction</subject><subject>Child</subject><subject>Durapatite</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Hearing Aids</subject><subject>Hearing Loss - etiology</subject><subject>Hearing Loss - rehabilitation</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Operative Time</subject><subject>Postoperative Complications - etiology</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Prosthesis Design</subject><subject>Suture Anchors</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>1308-7649</issn><issn>2148-3817</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><recordid>eNpd0EFP2zAUwHELbYKK9bjrZGmXXVL8bDe2d-vKBkhIIJWdI9t52YySuLMTUL89ico44Mu7_PT0_CfkM7DVGtb8Iti44gzKFRijT8iCg9SF0KA-kAUIpgtVSnNGljk_sumVXEkhT8kZV0Iyo_SC2IfnSC9D02DCfqD3mPw42B7jmOmP2GOx6f3fmLCm12hT6P_QTajpxo1DN_vdIQ_Y5e90G7u9TXYIT0i3beiDty3dDWN9-EQ-NrbNuHyd5-T3r58P2-vi9u7qZru5Lbwo2VBI6yQy5xXjAtZac2a8rxuny8Yz5xygF8aWEo0zBkQDUnFrrSob5tfCl-KcfDvu3af4b8Q8VF3IHtv2-JsKNGMggAmY6Nd39DGOqZ-um5UApQSfVXFUPsWcEzbVPoXOpkMFrJrzV1P-as5fzfkn_-V16-g6rN_0_9jiBcqpf-4</recordid><startdate>20160401</startdate><enddate>20160401</enddate><creator>Polat, Beldan</creator><creator>İşeri, Mete</creator><creator>Orhan, Kadir Serkan</creator><creator>Yılmazer, Ayça Başkadem</creator><creator>Enver, Necati</creator><creator>Ceylan, Didem</creator><creator>Kara, Ahmet</creator><creator>Güldiken, Yahya</creator><creator>Çomoğlu, Şenol</creator><general>Mediterranean Society for Otology and Audiology</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>EDSIH</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20160401</creationdate><title>Two Different Percutaneous Bone-Anchored Hearing Aid Abutment Systems: Comparative Clinical Study</title><author>Polat, Beldan ; İşeri, Mete ; Orhan, Kadir Serkan ; Yılmazer, Ayça Başkadem ; Enver, Necati ; Ceylan, Didem ; Kara, Ahmet ; Güldiken, Yahya ; Çomoğlu, Şenol</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-4ab4e0bc70231588209ccdfb86fc0bbb1ec39a64e9b9913f1472aaa76f0c53c63</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Auditory Threshold</topic><topic>Bone Conduction</topic><topic>Child</topic><topic>Durapatite</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Hearing Aids</topic><topic>Hearing Loss - etiology</topic><topic>Hearing Loss - rehabilitation</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Operative Time</topic><topic>Postoperative Complications - etiology</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Prosthesis Design</topic><topic>Suture Anchors</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Polat, Beldan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>İşeri, Mete</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Orhan, Kadir Serkan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yılmazer, Ayça Başkadem</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Enver, Necati</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ceylan, Didem</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kara, Ahmet</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Güldiken, Yahya</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Çomoğlu, Şenol</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Turkey Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The journal of international advanced otology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Polat, Beldan</au><au>İşeri, Mete</au><au>Orhan, Kadir Serkan</au><au>Yılmazer, Ayça Başkadem</au><au>Enver, Necati</au><au>Ceylan, Didem</au><au>Kara, Ahmet</au><au>Güldiken, Yahya</au><au>Çomoğlu, Şenol</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Two Different Percutaneous Bone-Anchored Hearing Aid Abutment Systems: Comparative Clinical Study</atitle><jtitle>The journal of international advanced otology</jtitle><addtitle>J Int Adv Otol</addtitle><date>2016-04-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>12</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>23</spage><epage>27</epage><pages>23-27</pages><issn>1308-7649</issn><eissn>2148-3817</eissn><abstract>To compare two different percutaneous bone-anchored hearing aid (BAHA) abutment systems regarding operation time, scar healing, quality of life, implant stability, audiologic results, and complications.
The study involves a prospective multi-center clinical evaluation. Thirty-two consecutive patients who had undergone BAHA surgery from January 2011 to January 2013 in two tertiary centers were included in the study. The Glasgow Inventory Benefit Score was used to assess the patients at least 6 months after surgery. The operation time and complications were recorded. Implant stability quotient (ISQ) values were recorded using resonance frequency analysis. Holger's classification was used to evaluate skin reactions.
The mean length of the operation was 39.2±4 min for standard abutment and 18.3±5.7 min for hydroxyapatite-coated abutment. ISQ scores were significantly better for standard abutment in all tests. The mean total Glasgow Inventory Benefit Score was 39.3±19 for the standard abutment and 46.3±24.5 for the hydroxyapatite-coated abutment groups, but there was no statistical significance between the two groups. There was no difference in audiological improvement between the two groups after surgery.
Hydroxyapatite-coated abutment provided a shorter operation time that was significantly different from standard abutment. There were no significant differences between standard abutment and hydroxyapatite-coated abutment regarding audiologic improvement, quality of life, loading time, and complications.</abstract><cop>Turkey</cop><pub>Mediterranean Society for Otology and Audiology</pub><pmid>27340978</pmid><doi>10.5152/iao.2016.1998</doi><tpages>5</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1308-7649 |
| ispartof | The journal of international advanced otology, 2016-04, Vol.12 (1), p.23-27 |
| issn | 1308-7649 2148-3817 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1800131031 |
| source | MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals |
| subjects | Adolescent Adult Aged Auditory Threshold Bone Conduction Child Durapatite Female Hearing Aids Hearing Loss - etiology Hearing Loss - rehabilitation Humans Male Operative Time Postoperative Complications - etiology Prospective Studies Prosthesis Design Suture Anchors Young Adult |
| title | Two Different Percutaneous Bone-Anchored Hearing Aid Abutment Systems: Comparative Clinical Study |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-02T14%3A47%3A40IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Two%20Different%20Percutaneous%20Bone-Anchored%20Hearing%20Aid%20Abutment%20Systems:%20Comparative%20Clinical%20Study&rft.jtitle=The%20journal%20of%20international%20advanced%20otology&rft.au=Polat,%20Beldan&rft.date=2016-04-01&rft.volume=12&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=23&rft.epage=27&rft.pages=23-27&rft.issn=1308-7649&rft.eissn=2148-3817&rft_id=info:doi/10.5152/iao.2016.1998&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E4114263801%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1803177321&rft_id=info:pmid/27340978&rfr_iscdi=true |