Long term cutaneous complications related to bone conduction hearing implants. A retrospective study (2004–2018)

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to establish the frequency of cutaneous complications due to surgically implanted bone conduction hearing aids in recipients treated at a tertiary otolaryngology center. Additionally, based on the literature review, we propose a scale to standardize the report of cutaneous reactions related to transcutaneous systems to objectify future studies.MethodsA retrospective chart review was conducted for patients who were implanted with bone conduction hearing systems between 2004 and 2018. Patients with minimum follow up of 6 months were included. Patient demographics, surgical characteristics and clinical course was analyzed by number and skin reactions. Transcutaneous and percutaneous systems were analyzed separately. The study was approved by the local IRB.ResultsA total of 104 devices were implanted on 88 patients with an average follow up of 4.04 (range of 0.5 - 10 years). Out of the total of patients, 49 (55.7%) developed at least one episode of inflammatory/infectious skin reaction at surgical incision site. A total of 148 episodes of local infections during the entire follow-up period were registered, mostly mild in severity with no triggering factors identified. The majority of the initial episodes of infection occurred within the first 3 years of follow-up. Out of the total of patients, 47 (53.4%) reported pain at the surgical site at some point throughout follow-up, not associated with clinically evident infection.ConclusionThe incidence of skin complications in our series seemed higher compared to previous reports. Minor complications were the most common and responded well to topical treatment. No triggering factors were identified as the cause of the infections, nor to explain the frequency or the severity of such an adverse reaction. Isolated pain was present in the majority of patients with conductive hearing devices, even without signs of active infection. Due to its high incidence it should be assessed in all patients that receive an implant.Based on a search of the literature, a scale to standardize cutaneous complications of transcutaneous implants was undertaken, but further studies are needed to validate such a scale.     

Estratificación basal de riesgo en pacientes mayores de 75 años con infarto y shock cardiogénico referidos para angioplastia primaria

Background and objectivesPatients older than 75 years with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary angioplasty in cardiogenic shock have high mortality. Identification of preprocedural predictors of short- and long-term mortality could be useful to guide decision-making and further interventions.MethodsWe analyzed a nationwide registry of primary angioplasty in the elderly (ESTROFA MI + 75) comprising 3576 patients. The characteristics and outcomes of the subgroup of patients in cardiogenic shock were analyzed to identify associated factors and prognostic predictors in order to derive a baseline risk prediction score for 1-year mortality. The score was validated in an independent cohort.ResultsA total of 332 patients were included. Baseline independent predictors of mortality were anterior myocardial infarction (HR 2.8, 95%CI, 1.4-6.0; P = .005), ejection fraction < 40% (HR 2.3, 95%CI, 1.14-4.50; P = .018), and time from symptom onset to angioplasty > 6 hours (HR 3.2, 95%CI, 1.6-7.5; P = .001). A score was designed that included these predictive factors (score “6-ANT-40”). Survival at 1 year was 54.5% for patients with score 0, 32.3% for score 1, 27.4% for score 2 and 17% for score 3 (P = .004, c-statistic 0.70). The score was validated in an independent cohort of 124 patients, showing 1-year survival rates of 64.5%, 40.0%, 28.9%, and 22.2%, respectively (P = .008, c-statistic 0.68).ConclusionsA preprocedural score based on 3 simple clinical variables (anterior location, ejection fraction < 40%, and delay time > 6 hours) may be used to estimate survival after primary angioplasty in elderly patients with cardiogenic shock and to guide preinterventional decision-making.