Hearing outcomes of atresia surgery versus osseointegrated bone conduction device in patients with congenital aural atresia: a systematic review

Abstract

Objective: To perform a systematic review, comparing hearing outcomes of atresiaplasty versus osseointegrated bone conduction device (OBCD) in congenital aural atresia (CAA) patients.

Data sources: Approximately 107 studies, published from 1975 to 2012, evaluating hearing outcomes after atresiaplasty and/or OBCD in CAA patients were identified through a PubMed search.

Study selection: Articles that evaluated external auditory canal stenosis alone, did not report speech reception threshold (SRT), pure tone average (PTA), hearing gain, or air-bone gap (ABG) or had less than 5 patients were excluded. For authors or institutions with multiple reports, the largest or most recent study was included. Forty-one articles satisfied our inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Data extraction: The number and percentage of ears with a postoperative SRT, PTA, ABG less than 30 dB, and/or average hearing gain were extracted. The total number of ears and the timing of the postoperative audiogram were also noted.

Data synthesis: Of the atresiaplasty ears, 73.8% (95% CI, 62.2%-85.4%), had a SRT less than 30 dB (338 ears), 60.3% (95% CI, 45.8%-74.8%) had a PTA less than 30 dB (390 ears), and 68.9% (95% CI, 59.4%-78.3%) had an ABG less than 30 dB (852 ears). The average hearing gain was 24.1 dB (95% CI, 21.62-26.51) for 516 ears. Hearing outcomes deteriorated with time. Of OBCD patients, 95.9% (95% CI, 91.5%-100.0%) had a PTA less than 30 dB (77 ears), and 98.2% (95% CI, 94.5%-100.0%) had an ABG less than 30 dB (47 ears); the average hearing gain was 38.0 dB (95% CI, 33.14-45.22) in 100 ears.

Conclusion: The OBCD has better hearing outcomes compared with atresiaplasty in patients with CAA.