title: Bone conduction implants: transcutaneous vs. percutaneous.
abstract: Clinical experience with transcutaneous bone conduction implants has demonstrated that they are most beneficial for patients with purely conductive hearing loss in at least one ear. Percutaneous bone conduction implants, however, have been reported to provide adequate benefit for patients with mixed hearing loss with bone conduction pure-tone averages up to 45 dB HL (Tjellstrom, 1989). The results of 24 Xomed Audiant osseointegrated bone conduction hearing devices (including a clinical trial on two patients using a new, larger magnet [Neodynium Iron Boron]), plus the results of eleven patients implanted and fitted with the percutaneous bone-anchored hearing aid are reported. Aided results with these devices will be presented. In addition, general comparisons of benefit obtained with the two devices will be made for patients who exhibit similar hearing losses. Finally, a direct comparison will be made on two patients who have undergone both implant procedures.
authors.affiliation: Markham/Stouffville Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
authors.forename: P S
authors.initials: PS
authors.lastname: Wade
authors.forename: J J
authors.initials: JJ
authors.lastname: Halik
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Chasin
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D001301:Audiometry, Pure-Tone; D001844:Bone Conduction; D002648:Child; D005260:Female; D006310:Hearing Aids; D006314:Hearing Loss, Conductive / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000601:surgery; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D019736:Prostheses and Implants