66 84

Cited 7 times in

Surgical and Audiologic Comparison Between Sophono and Bone-Anchored Hearing Aids Implantation

 Joong-Wook Shin  ;  Sung Huhn Kim  ;  Jae Young Choi  ;  Hong-Joon Park  ;  Seung-Chul Lee  ;  Jee-Sun Choi  ;  Han Q Park  ;  Ho-Ki Lee 
 Clinical and Experimental Otorhinolaryngology, Vol.9(1) : 21-26, 2016 
Journal Title
 Clinical and Experimental Otorhinolaryngology 
Issue Date
Aural Atresia, Congenital ; Bone Conduction ; Hearing Aids ; Hearing Loss ; Hearing Loss, Conductive
OBJECTIVES: Bone-anchored hearing aids (BAHA) occasionally cause soft tissue problems due to abutment. Because Sophono does not have abutment penetrating skin, it is thought that Sophono has no soft tissue problem relating to abutment. On the other hand, transcutaneous device's output is reported to be 10 to 15 dB lower than percutaneous device. Therefore, in this study, Sophono and BAHA were compared to each other from surgical and audiological points of view. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 9 Sophono patients and 10 BAHA patients. In BAHA cases, single vertical incision without skin thinning technique was done. We compared Sophono to BAHA by operation time, wound healing time, postoperative complications, postoperative hearing gain after switch on, and postoperative air-bone gap. RESULTS: The mean operation time was 60 minutes for Sophono and 25 minutes for BAHA. The wound healing time was 14 days for Sophono and 28 days for BAHA. No major intraoperative complication was observed. Skin problem was not observed in the 2 devices for the follow-up period. Postoperative hearing gain of bilateral aural atresia patients was 39.4 dB for BAHA (n=4) and 25.5 dB for Sophono (n=5). However, the difference was not statistically significant. In all patients included in this study, the difference of air-bone gap between two groups was 16.6 dB at 0.5 kHz and 18.2 dB at 4 kHz. BAHA was statistically significantly better than Sophono. CONCLUSION: Considering the audiologic outcome, BAHA users were thought to have more audiologic benefit than Sophono users. However, Sophono had advantages over BAHA with abutment in cosmetic outcome. Sophono needed no daily skin maintenance and soft tissue complication due to abutment would not happen in Sophono. Therefore, a full explanation about each device is necessary before deciding implantation.
Files in This Item:
T201604430.pdf Download
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Otorhinolaryngology (이비인후과학교실) > 1. Journal Papers
Yonsei Authors
Kim, Sung Huhn(김성헌)
Choi, Jae Young(최재영) ORCID logo https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9493-3458
RIS (EndNote)
XLS (Excel)
사서에게 알리기


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.