Expert opinion on candidacy for bone conduction hearing implants Osia System and Baha Connect System.

Abstract

<b>Introduction:</b> Bone conduction hearing implants (BCHI) are a widely used rehabilitation solution for patients with conductive hearing loss (CHL), mixed hearing loss (MHL), or single-sided deafness (SSD).<b>Aim:</b> This expert review presents candidacy criteria considerations when choosing between active transcutaneous bone-conduction hearing devices (Osia<sup></sup> System) and passive percutaneous bone-conduction hearing devices (Baha<sup></sup> Connect System) to help streamline the decision-making process in those contexts where economics have a major impact on professionals' and patients' choice.<b>Methods:</b> Eight experts participated in two online surveys and two virtual meetings to discuss real-world clinical experience to highlight treatment approaches and factors considered when counseling the patients and selecting an optimal BCHI solution. Key considerations for decision-making were recorded following consensus from all experts.<b>Conclusions:</b> Aspects in decision making include the requirement to use local <i>versus</i> general anesthesia for the implantation procedure, bone thickness, considerations for future magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) procedures, and patient preference. Increased risk of skin infections, requirements for cleaning and managing the implant site, particularly for those with limited dexterity, as well as esthetic concerns could make the Baha<sup></sup> Connect System unsuitable for some patients. In these cases, the Osia<sup></sup> System may provide clear advantages, particularly in patients for whom good hearing performance is a priority, and this would need to be discussed individually with the patient in a multidisciplinary setting. Conversely, for patients requiring minimally invasive surgery, who have contraindications for general anesthesia or require frequent head MRI scans in the future, the Baha Connect System may be more suitable.