Advertisement

European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology

, Volume 270, Issue 7, pp 2027–2033 | Cite as

Esteem® middle ear device versus conventional hearing aids for rehabilitation of bilateral sensorineural hearing loss

  • Simonetta Monini
  • Michela Biagini
  • Francesca Atturo
  • Maurizio BarbaraEmail author
Otology

Abstract

This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of the Esteem® middle ear implant in sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) of different degree as well as to compare it with that obtained with conventional hearing aids. Fifteen out of 30 adults patients who received an Esteem® middle ear device for rehabilitation of sensorineural hearing loss met the primary eligibility criterion of prior, continuous use of conventional hearing aids. Study population included moderate-to-severe SNHL (8 patients) and severe-to-profound SNHL (7 patients). Audiometric measurements included free-field pure-tone and speech audiometry in Esteem®-aided, HA-aided, and baseline threshold. For speech audiometry, speech reception threshold (SRT) and word recognition score (WRS) were assessed. Subjective benefit was evaluated by Client Oriented Scale of Improvement (COSI) questionnaire. In all the subjects, SRT and WRS showed improvement both with conventional HA and Esteem® in respect to the unaided situation. Although not statistically significant, a slight prevalence of the Esteem® performances was recorded both audiometrically and as subjective satisfaction score. The Esteem® middle ear device demonstrated appreciable benefit for rehabilitation of SNHL of different degree, comparable to what can be achieved by conventional hearing aids. In addition, this rehabilitative process may enable also individuals presenting with severe-to-profound SNHL to achieve remarkable functional outcomes.

Keywords

Esteem® Sensorineural hearing loss Hearing aids Active middle ear implant 

Notes

Conflict of interest

None of the authors received any sponsorship or funding arrangements related to the present work or conflicts of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Kroll K, Grant IL, Javel E (2002) The Envoy totally implantable hearing system St. Croix Medical. Trends Amplif 6:73–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barbara M, Manni V, Monini S (2009) Totally implantable middle ear device for rehabilitation of sensorineural hearing loss: preliminary experience with Esteem, Envoy. Acta Otolaryngol 129:429–432PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wagner F, Tods I, Wagner J (2010) Indications and candidacy for active middle ear implants. Adv Otorhinolaryngol 69:20–26PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zenner HP, Rodriguez Jorge J (2010) Totally implantable middle ear implants: ten years’ experience at the University of Tubingen. Adv Otorhinolaryngol 69:72–84PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Memari F, Asqari A, Daneshi A, Jalali A (2011) Safety and patient selection of totally implantable hearing aid surgery: envoy system, Esteem. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 268:1421–1425PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kraus EM, Shohet JA, Catalano PJ (2011) Envoy esteem totally implantable hearing system: phase 2 trial, I-year hearing results. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 23:1–10Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gerard JM, Thill MP, Chantrain G, Gersdorff M, Deggouj N (2012) Esteem 2 middle ear implant: our experience. Audiol Neurotol 17:267–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Barbara M, Biagini M, Monini S (2011) The totally implantable middle ear device “Esteem” for severe sensorineural hearing loss. Acta Otolaryngol 131:399–404PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Goode RL, Rosenbaum ML, Maniglia AJ (1995) The history and development of the implantable hearing aid. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 28(1):1–16PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Uziel A, Mondain M, Hagen P, Dejean F, Doucet G (2003) Rehabilitation for high-frequency sensorineural hearing impairment in adults with the Symphonix Vibrant Soundbridge: a comparative study. Otol Neurotol 24:775–783PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Boeheim K, Pok SM, Schloagel M, Filzmoser P (2010) Active middle ear implant compared with open-fit hearing aid in sloping high-frequency sensorineural hearing loss. Otol Neurotol 31:424–429PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sziklai I, Szilvassy J (2011) Functional gain and speech understanding obtained by Vibrant Sound bridge or by open-fit hearing aid. Acta Otolaryngol 131:428–433PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shohet JA, Kraus EM, Catalano PJ (2011) Profound high-frequency sensorineural hearing loss treatment with a totally implantable hearing system. Otol Neurotol 32:1428–1431PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Toysome JR, Moorthy R, Lee A, Jiang D, O’Connor AF (2010) Systematic Review of middle ear Implants: do they improve hearing as much as conventional hearing aid? Otol Neurotol 31:1369–1375Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Simonetta Monini
    • 1
  • Michela Biagini
    • 1
  • Francesca Atturo
    • 1
  • Maurizio Barbara
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Neuroscience, Mental Health and Sensory OrgansOtorhinolaryngology Clinic, Medicine and Psychology, Sapienza UniversityRomeItaly
  2. 2.Head ENT Clinic Azienda Ospedaliera Sant’AndreaRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations