Implantable middle ear hearing devices: Current state of technology and market challenges

Current Opinion in Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery

Volumn 14, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 314-318

  Backous, Douglas D ^a   Duke, William ^b  

^a VIRGINIA MASON MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b MADIGAN ARMY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Electromagnetic; Hearing; Implantable; Middle ear; Piezoelectric

Indexed keywords

COCHLEA PROSTHESIS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COST; ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; HEARING AID; HUMAN; MARKET; MEDICAL SPECIALIST; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; MIDDLE EAR IMPLANT; PIEZOELECTRICITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROCESS DEVELOPMENT; RELIABILITY; REVIEW; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

HEARING AIDS; HEARING LOSS; HUMANS; OSSICULAR PROSTHESIS; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; PROSTHESIS IMPLANTATION; UNITED STATES; UNITED STATES FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION;

EID: 33748766073     PISSN: 10689508     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.moo.0000244187.66807.30     Document Type: Review

References (13)

1. Huttenbrink K-B. Current status and critical reflections on implantable hearing aids. Am J Otology 1999; 20:409-415.
2. Ko WH, Zhu WL, Kane M, et al. Engineering principles applied to implantable otologic devices. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 2001; 34:299-314.
3. Leutje CM, Brackmann D, Balkany TJ, et al. Phase III clinical trial results with the Vibrant® Soundbridge implantable middle ear hearing device: a prospective control study. Otolaryngol Head and Neck Surg 2002; 126:97-107.
4. Sterkers O, Boucarra D, Labassi S, et al. A middle ear implant, the Symphonix® Vibrant Soundbridge: a retrospective study of the first 125 patients implanted in France. Otol Neurotol 2003; 24:427-436.
5. Lenarz T, Mojallal H, Rose S. Long-term study of 'Vibrant® Soundbridge' implantable hearing aids [abstract]. In: Abstracts of the 9th International Conference on Cochlear Implants and Related Sciences. Suppl 119, Springer Wein: New York, NY, 14-17 June 2006. p. 82.
6. Mosnier I, Boucarra D, Bozorg-Grayeli A, et al. Vibrant Soundbridge implant: 5 years results of the first 100 French patients [abstract]. In: Abstracts of the 9th International Conference on Cochlear Implants and Related Sciences. Suppl 119, Springer Wein: New York, NY, 14-17 June 2006. p. 82.
7. Coletti V, Carner M, Coletti L. The bionic middle ear for the failures of osssiculoplasty. In: Abstracts of the 9th International Conference on Cochlear Implants and Related Sciences. Suppl 119, Springer Wein: New York, NY, 14-17 June 2006. p. 74.
8. Lefebvre P, DeCat M, Cremers C, et al. Otologics fully implantable hearing device results [abstract]. In: Abstracts of the 9th International Conference on Cochlear Implants and Related Sciences. Suppl 119, Springer Wein: New York, NY, 14-17 June 2006. p. 84.
9. Chen DA, Backous DD, Arriaga MA, et al. Phase 1 clinical trial results of the envoy system: a totally implantable middle ear device for sensorineural hearing loss. Otolaryngol Head and Neck Surg 2004; 131:904-916.
10. Yanagihara N, Sato H, Hinohira Y, et al. Long-term results using a piezoelectric semi-implantable middle ear hearing device: the Rion device E-type. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 2001; 34:389-400.
11. Zenner HP, Leysieffer H. Total implantation of the Implex TICA hearing amplifier for high frequency sensorineural haring loss: the Tubigen University experience. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 2001; 34:417-446.
12. Roland PS, Shoup AG, Shea CM, et al. Verification of improved patient outcomes with a partially implantable hearing aid: the Soundtec direct hearing system. Laryngoscope 2001; 111:1682-1686.
13. Gantz BJ, Turner C, Gfeller KE, et al. Preservation of hearing in cochlear implant surgery: advantages of combined electrical and acoustical speech processing. Laryngoscope 2005; 115:796-802. This study presents a very innovational approach to treat patients not well served by conventional air-conduction hearing aids who, previously, were not considered cochlear implant candidates.