Long-Term Results of the Linear Incision Technique With Tissue Reduction Versus Tissue Preservation for Inserting Bone-Anchored Hearing Implants: The Ongoing Optimization in Bone Implant Surgery

Abstract

Objective To compare the long-term outcomes of the linear incision technique with tissue reduction (LIT-TR) and the linear incision technique with tissue preservation (LIT-TP) for inserting bone-anchored hearing implants (BAHIs). Study design Single-center retrospective cohort study. Setting Large general teaching hospital. Patients A total of 231 adult patients were included between August 2005 and October 2020, with a minimum follow-up time of 6 months. Intervention The test group received a BAHI using the LIT-TP (N = 147). The control group underwent surgery using the LIT-TR (N = 84). Main outcome measures Soft tissue reactions, skin thickening, postoperative complications (e.g., wound dehiscence), and implant loss were compared between the test and control group. Furthermore, Cochlear Bone Anchored Solutions AB (Mölnlycke, Sweden) and Oticon Medical AB (Askim, Sweden) implants/abutments within the LIT-TP cohort were compared. Validated questionnaires were used to quantify patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Results Significantly more cases with wound dehiscence and adverse soft tissue reactions (Holgers ≥2) were observed in the LIT-TR cohort (p < 0.001). However, the LIT-TP cohort showed significantly more cases with skin thickening (requiring treatment) within the first 2 years after implantation. There were no differences in implant loss rates, overall soft tissue reactions (Holgers >1), and overall HRQoL between the two patient groups. Significant improvement in the patients' HRQoL after implementation of a BAHI was found in both techniques. The Ponto Wide implant/abutment showed less frequent skin thickening (requiring treatment) and fewer soft tissue reactions compared with the BIA400 implant/abutment. Conclusion This large-scale study demonstrates that the LIT-TP shows excellent long-term outcomes, including a low incidence of implant failure.