This study aimed to investigate the benefit of Bonebridge devices in patients with single-sided deafness.

Five patients with single-sided deafness who were implanted with Bonebridge devices were recruited in a single-centre study. Participants’ speech perception and horizontal sound localisation abilities were assessed at 6 and 12 months post-operatively. Speech intelligibility in noisy environments was measured in three different testing conditions (speech and noise presented from the front, speech and noise presented from the front and contralateral (normal ear) side separately, and speech presented from the ipsilateral (implanted Bonebridge) side and noise from the contralateral side). Sound localisation was evaluated in Bonebridge-aided and Bonebridge-unaided conditions at different stimuli levels (65, 70 and 75 dB SPL).

All participants showed a better capacity for speech intelligibility in quiet environments with the Bonebridge device. The speech recognition threshold with the Bonebridge device was significantly decreased at both short- and long-term follow up in the speech presented from the ipsilateral (implanted Bonebridge) side and noise from the contralateral side condition (p < 0.05). Additionally, participants maintained similar levels of sound localisation between the Bonebridge-aided and unaided conditions (p > 0.05). However, the accuracy of localisation showed some improvement at 70 dB SPL and 75 dB SPL post-operatively.

The Bonebridge device provides the benefit of improved speech perception performance in patients with single-sided deafness. Sound localisation abilities were neither improved nor worsened with Bonebridge implantation at the follow-up assessments.

To determine the prevalence and distribution of inner-ear malformations in congenital single-sided deafness cases, as details of malformation type are crucial for disease prognosis and management.

A retrospective study was conducted of 90 patients aged under 16 years with congenital single-sided deafness. Radiological findings were evaluated using computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. Inner-ear malformations were identified and cochlear nerve status was determined in affected ears.

Out of 90 ears, 42 (46.7 per cent) were found to have inner-ear malformation. Isolated cochlear aperture stenosis was the most common anomaly (n = 18, 20 per cent), followed by isolated cochlear aperture atresia (n = 11, 12.2 per cent) and cochlear hypoplasia (n = 7, 7.8 per cent). Cochlear nerve deficiency was encountered in 41 ears (45.6 per cent). The internal auditory canal was also stenotic in 49 ears (54.4 per cent).

Inner-ear malformations, especially cochlear aperture anomalies, are involved in the aetiology of single-sided deafness more than expected. The cause of single-sided deafness differs greatly between congenital and adult-onset cases. All children with single-sided deafness should undergo radiological evaluation, as the prognosis and management, as well as the aetiology, may be significantly influenced by inner-ear malformation type.

This study aimed to report the bone-anchored hearing aid uptake and the reasons for their rejection by unilateral sensorineural deafness patients.

A retrospective review of 90 consecutive unilateral sensorineural deafness patients referred to the Greater Manchester Bone-Anchored Hearing Aid Programme between September 2008 and August 2011 was performed.

In all, 79 (87.8 per cent) were deemed audiologically suitable: 24 (30.3 per cent) eventually had a bone-anchored hearing aid implanted and 55 (69.6 per cent) patients declined. Of those who declined, 26 (47.3 per cent) cited perceived limited benefits, 18 (32.7 per cent) cited reservations regarding surgery, 13 (23.6 per cent) preferred a wireless contralateral routing of sound device and 12 (21.8 per cent) cited cosmetic reasons. In all, 32 (40.5 per cent) suitable patients eventually chose the wireless contralateral routing of sound device.

The uptake rate was 30 per cent for audiologically suitable patients. Almost half of suitable patients did not perceive a sufficient benefit to proceed to device implantation and a significant proportion rejected it. It is therefore important that clinicians do not to rush to implant all unilateral sensorineural hearing loss patients with a bone-anchored hearing aid.

Most of the literature regarding osseointegrated implantation for hearing rehabilitation focuses on the 5.5 mm abutment. This study aimed to add to the data available on the survival of the 8.5 mm abutment, and to describe its utility in obese patients.

To review the outcomes of patients who received a bone-anchored hearing aid implant, and create a model comparing the mechanical forces acting upon combinations of fixture and abutment lengths.

Retrospective chart review and mathematical modelling.

In this retrospective cohort study comprising 25 patients, less abutment overgrowth was observed in the 8.5 mm abutment recipients versus recipients of the 5.5 mm abutment. When the principle of equilibrium of a rigid body was applied, the 8.5 mm abutment was at a calculated mechanical disadvantage compared with the 5.5 mm abutment.

The 8.5 mm abutment may be useful in patients with copious subcutaneous soft tissue as in the obese population. The 8.5 mm abutment has a calculated mechanical disadvantage, potentially putting the implant under greater mechanical stress; however, the clinical relevance of this is unclear.