liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Percutaneous Versus Transcutaneous Bone Conduction Implant System: A Feasibility Study on a Cadaver Head
Chalmers Unviversity.
Sahlgrens University Hospital.
Chalmers Unviversity.
Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Technical Audiology.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-3350-8997
Show others and affiliations
2008 (English)In: Otology and Neurotology, ISSN 1531-7129, E-ISSN 1537-4505, Vol. 29, no 8, 1132-1139 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Objective: Percutaneous bone-anchored hearing aid (BAHA) is an important rehabilitation alternative for patients who have conductive or mixed hearing loss. However, these devices use a percutaneous and bone-anchored implant that has some drawbacks reported. A transcutaneous bone conduction implant system (BCI) is proposed as an alternative to the percutaneous system because it leaves the skin intact. The BCI transmits the signal to a permanently implanted transducer with an induction loop system through the intact skin. The aim of this study was to compare the electroacoustic performance of the BAHA Classic-300 with a full-scale BCI on a cadaver head in a sound field. The BCI comprised the audio processor of the vibrant sound bridge connected to a balanced vibration transducer (balanced electromagnetic separation transducer).

Methods: Implants with snap abutments were placed in the parietal bone (Classic-300) and 15-mm deep in the temporal bone (BCI). The vibration responses at the ipsilateral and contralateral cochlear promontories were measured with a laser Doppler vibrometer, with the beam aimed through the ear canal.

Results: Results show that the BCI produces approximately 5 dB higher maximum output level and has a slightly lower distortion than the Classic-300 at the ipsilateral promontorium at speech frequencies. At the contralateral promontorium, the maximum output level was considerably lower for the BCI than for the Classic-300 except in the 1-2 kHz range, where it was similar.

Conclusion: Present results support the proposal that a BCI system can be a realistic alternative to a BAHA.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2008. Vol. 29, no 8, 1132-1139 p.
Keyword [en]
Bone conduction, Hearing, Implant, Transcutaneous
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-16205DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0b013e31816fdc90OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-16205DiVA: diva2:133433
Available from: 2009-01-12 Created: 2009-01-09 Last updated: 2014-10-08

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full text

Authority records BETA

Stenfelt, Stefan

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Stenfelt, Stefan
By organisation
Faculty of Health SciencesTechnical Audiology
In the same journal
Otology and Neurotology
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 212 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf