Implantable Hearing Devices Besides Cochlear and Brain Stem Implants

  • Gauri Mankekar


The prevalence of hearing loss increases with age in the general population. Of the more than 30 million Americans having severe hearing loss, only 20 % with hearing loss significant enough to warrant amplification actually seek assistance for amplification [1]. The severity of hearing loss may range (Table 2.1) from mild, wherein the individual only has difficulty in presence of significant background noise, to profound, wherein the patient is unable to understand and communicate even in the quietest of situations [2]. Patients with a mild loss do not require treatment other than instructions to choose or modify their acoustic environment and to reduce background noise, thereby improving their hearing experience. But patients with moderate to severe and profound hearing loss will require either surgery or some form of amplification to improve their hearing. Amplification with conventional hearing aids is offered when the patient has either a significant sensorineural component of hearing loss or when middle ear reconstruction with passive implants is not beneficial due to middle ear mucosal and tubal dysfunction. Conventional hearing aids are associated with several drawbacks, and so, researchers and otologists have been trying to devise implantable hearing devices for the past several decades.


Hearing Loss Tympanic Membrane Round Window Ossicular Chain Profound Hearing Loss 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Haynes DS, Young JA, Wanna GB, Glasscock ME. Middle ear implantable hearing devices: an overview. Trends Amplif. 2009;13(3):206–14. doi: 10.1177/1084713809346262.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Slattery III WH. Chapter 32. Implantable hearing devices. In: Brackmann D, Shelton C, Arriaga MA, editors. Otologic surgery. 3rd ed.; Neck Surgery. 5th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Mosby Elsevier; 2010.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Manrique M, Valdivieso A, et al. ‘Review of audiometric criteria in treatment of neurosensorial deafness with hearing aids and implantable hearing devices’. Acta Otorrinolaringol Esp. 2008;59:30–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kulkarni K, Hartley DEH. Recent advances in hearing restoration. J R Soc Med. 2008;101:116–24.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Plester D. History of middle ear implants. In: Grote JJ, editor. Biomaterials in otology. Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers; 1984.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wilska A. Einmethode zur bestimmung der horsch wellanamplituden des trommelfells bei verscheiden frequenzen. Skand Arch Physiol. 1935;72:161–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chasin M. A brief history of middle ear implants. Hear J. 2008;61(8):38–9.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rutschmann J. Magnetic audition: auditory stimulation by means of alternating magnetic fields acting on a permanent magnet fixed to the eardrum. IRE Trans Med Electron. 1959;6:22–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Goode RL. An implantable hearing aid. State of the art. Trans Am Acad Opthalmol Otolaryngol. 1970;74(1):128–39.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Goode RL. Electromagnetic implantable hearing aids. In: Suzuki J-I, editor. Advances in audiology. Basel: Karger; 1988. p. 44–31.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fredrickson J, Tomlinson D, David E, Odvist M. Evaluation of an electromagnetic implantable hearing aid. Can J Otolaryngol. 1973;2:53–62.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fredrickson J, Cotcchia D, Kohosla S. Investigations into an implantable electromagnetic hearing device for moderate to severe sensorineural loss. Otolargol Clin North Am. 1995;28(1):107–20.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fredrickson JM, Coticchia JM, Khosla S. Current status in the development of implantable middle ear hearing aids, Advances in otolaryngology, vol. 10. St Louis: Mosby; 1996. p. 189–204.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yanagihara N, Suzuki J, Gyo K, Syono H, Ikeda H. Development of an implantable hearing aid using a piezoelectric vibrator of bimorph design: state of the art. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1984;92(6):706–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yanagihara N, Aritomo H, Yamanaka E, Gyo K. Implantable hearing aid: report of the first human applications. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1987;113(8)):869–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yanagihara N, Sato H, Hinohira Y, Gyo K, Hori K. Long-term results using a piezoelectric semi-implantable middle ear hearing device: the Rion device E-type. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2001;34(2):389–400.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gyo K, Yanagihara N, Saiki T, Hinohira Y. Present status and outlook of the implantable hearing aid. Am J Otol. 1990;11(4):250–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Suzuki J-I, Yanagihara N, Kadera K. The partially implantable middle ear implant, case reports. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1987;37:178–84.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Suzuki J, Kodera K, Nagai K, Yabe T. Long-term clinical results of the partially implantable piezoelectric middle ear implant. Ear Nose Throat J. 1994;73(2):104–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yanagihara N, Gyo K, Hinohira Y. Partially implantable hearing aid using piezoelectric ceramic ossicular vibrator. Results of the implant operation and assessment of the hearing afforded by the device. Otoloryngol Clin North Am. 1995;28(1):85–97.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ball G. No more laughing at the deaf boy. A technological adventure between Silicon Valley and the Alps. Innsbruck: Haymon Verlag; 2011.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mudry A, Tjellström A, Kompis M, Caversaccio MD, editors. Historical background of bone conduction hearing devices and bone conduction hearing aids: implantable bone conduction hearing aids. Adv Otorhinolaryngol (Basel, Karger). 2011;71:1–9. doi: 10.1159/000323569.
  23. 23.
    Heide J, Tatge G, Sander T, Gooch T, Prescott T. Development of a semi-implantable hearing device. Adv Audiology. 1988;4:32–43.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kartush JM, Tos M. Electromagnetic ossicular augmentation device. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 1995;28:155–72.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Snik A. Implantable hearing devices for conductive and sensorineural hearing impairment. In: Zeng FG, Popper AN, Fay RR, editors. Auditory prostheses. New horizons. New York: Springer Science + Business Media LLC; 2011.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zenner HP, Maassen MM, Lehner RL, Baumann JW, Leysieffer H. An implantable hearing aid for inner ear hearing loss. Short-term implantation of microphone and transducer. HNO. 1997;45(10):872–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zenner HP, Leysieffer H. Total implantation of the Implex TICA hearing amplifier implant for high frequency sensorineural hearing loss: the Tübingen University experience. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2001;34(2):417–46.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zenner HP, Limberger A, Baumann JW, Reischl G, Zalaman IM, Mauz PS, Sweetow RW, Plinkert PK, Zimmermann R, Baumann I, De Maddalena H, Leysieffer H, Maassen MM. Phase III results with a totally implantable piezoelectric middle ear implant: speech audiometry, spatial hearing and psychosocial adjustment. Acta Otolaryngol. 2004;124(2):155–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hough J, Dyer R, Matthews P, Wood M. Early clinical results: SOUNDTEC Implantable Hearing Device phase II study. Laryngoscope. 2001;111:1–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Matthews P, Wood MW, Dyer Jr RK. Middle ear electromagnetic semi-implantable hearing device: results of the phase II SoundTec Direct System clinical trial. Otol Neurotol. 2002;23(6):895–903.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Snik FM, Cremers WRJ. First audiometric results with the Vibrant Soundbridge, A semi-implantable hearing device for sensorineural hearing loss. Audiology. 1999;38:335–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Snik FM, Cremers WRJ. Vibrant semi-implantable hearing device with digital sound processing: effective gain and speech perception. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2001;127:1433–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sterkers O, Boucarra D, Labassi S. A middle-ear implant, the Symphonix Vibrant Soundbridge; Retrospective study of the first 125 patients implanted in France. Otol Neurotol. 2003;24:427–36.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kroll K, Grant IL, Javel E. The Envoy Totally Implantable Hearing System, St Croix Medical. Trends Amplif. 2002;6(2):73–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
  36. 36.
    Magnan J, Manrique M, Dillier N, Snik A, Hausler R. International consensus on middle ear implants. Acta Otolaryngol. 2005;125(9):920–1.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Snik A, Mylanus E, et al. Implantable hearing devices for sensorineural hearing loss: a review of the audiometric data. Clin Otolaryngol. 1998;23:414–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kiessling J. Neue Aspekte zur Hörgeräteversorgung bei Lärmschwerhörigkeit. HNO. 2006;54(7):573–82. doi: 10.1007/s00106-006-1423-6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Leuwer R. Gestörtes Hören. Die apparative Versorgung der Schwerhörigkeit: Konventionelle und implantierbare Geräte. Laryngo-Rhino-Otol. 2005;84 Suppl 1:S51–9. doi: 10.1055/s-2005-861131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Boeheim K, Pok SM, Schloegel M, Filzmoser P. Active middle ear implant compared with open-fit hearing aid in sloping high-frequency sensorineural hearing loss. Otolaryngol Neurotol. 2010;31(3):424–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Huttenbrink KB, Zahnert TH, Bornitz M, Hofmann G. Biomechanical aspects in implantable microphones and hearing aids and development of a concept with a hydroacoustical transmission. Acta Otolaryngol. 2001;121(2):185–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Gan RZ, Dai C, Wang X, Nakmali D, Wood MW. A totally implantable hearing system – design and function characterization in 3D computational model and temporal bones. Hear Res. 2010;263(1–2):138–44. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2009.09.003. Epub 2009 Sep 20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Clark JG. Uses and abuses of hearing loss classification. Asha. 1981;23:493–500.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Middle ear implant for sensorineural, conductive and mixed hearing losses. July 2010. Commonwealth of Australia. ISBN (Print) 978-1-74241-347-1; ISBN (Online) 978-1-74241-348-8Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer India 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ENT DepartmentPD Hinduja HospitalMahim, MumbaiIndia

Personalised recommendations