Active Bone Conduction Implant and Adhesive Bone Conduction Device: A Comparison of Audiological Performance and Subjective Satisfaction

Introduction Atresia of the external auditory canal affects 1 in every 10 thousand to 20 thousand live births, with a much higher prevalence in Latin America, at 5 to 21 out of every 10 thousand newborns. The treatment involves esthetic and functional aspects. Regarding the functional treatment, there are surgical and nonsurgical alternatives like spectacle frames and rigid and softband systems. Active transcutaneous bone conduction implants (BCIs) achieve good sound transmission and directly stimulate the bone. Objective To assess the audiological performance and subjective satisfaction of children implanted with an active transcutaneous BCI for more than one year and to compare the outcomes with a nonsurgical adhesive bone conduction device (aBCD) in the same users. Methods The present is a prospective, multicentric study. The audiological performance was evaluated at 1, 6, and 12 months postactivation, and after a 1-month trial with the nonsurgical device. Results Ten patients completed all tests. The 4-frequency pure-tone average (4PTA) in the unaided condition was of 65 dB HL, which improved significantly to 20 dB HL after using the BCI for 12 months. The speech recognition in quiet in the unaided condition was of 33% on average, which improved significantly, to 99% with the BCI, and to 91% with the aBCD. Conclusion The aBCD demonstrated sufficient hearing improvement and subjective satisfaction; thus, it is a good solution for hearing rehabilitation if surgery is not desired or not possible. If surgery is an option, the BCI is the superior device in terms of hearing outcomes, particularly background noise and subjective satisfaction.