Comparison of Osseointegration Outcomes in Percutaneous Bone-Anchored Hearing Implants: Linear Incision Versus Minimally Invasive Techniques.
retrospective_cohort · Level III
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 42726932.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1002/ohn.70431.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
To compare osseointegration outcomes between minimally invasive (MI) techniques and the linear incision (LI) technique for bone-anchored hearing implant placement. We conducted a retrospective, multicentre cohort study. Eight tertiary referral centers. Patients undergoing bone-anchored hearing implant placement with either MI or LI techniques were included. The primary endpoint was implant extrusion within 180 days post-placement, excluding trauma-related cases. Surgical technique was the main exposure variable. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to assess the risk of extrusion between techniques, adjusting for potential confounders. Eighty-eight patients were included in the LI group and 117 in the MI group. The 180-day non-traumatic extrusion rate was 16.24% (95% confidence interval [CI], 10-24) for the MI group and 1.14% (95% CI, 0.06-7.1) for the LI group. Multivariable analysis demonstrated a significantly higher extrusion risk with MI techniques (HR = 10.1; 95% CI, 1.34-76.7; P = .025). Our findings indicate a significantly increased extrusion risk with MI techniques compared with LI. Until higher-level evidence becomes available, LI should be preferred in patients at risk of compromised osseointegration.