Experience with Minimally Invasive Ponto Surgery and Linear Incision Approach for Pediatric and Adult Bone Anchored Hearing Implants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To compare intra- and postoperative outcomes between the standard linear incision with tissue preservation and the Minimally Invasive Ponto Surgery (MIPS). Study Design: A non-randomized retrospective cohort series. Methods: Medical files were reviewed of adult and pediatric bone anchored hearing implant recipients. Extracted outcomes included patient characteristics, implant survival, operative time, anesthesia use, intra and postoperative complications, soft tissue tolerability assessed by the Holger’s classification, and implant stability assessed by the Resonance Frequency Analysis (RFA). Outcomes were compared between two surgeries. Results: A total of 59 implants were placed (21 MIPS; 38 linear). Conductive hearing loss was the most common etiology for implantation. Surgery was conducted under local anesthesia in 67% of MIPS patients and 16% of linear patients. No intraoperative complications were reported for both surgical approaches and no implants were lost. Patients undergoing implantation via the MIPS approach displayed less skin reaction postoperatively, however this was not significant ( P = .2848). The most common Holgers score for both groups was grade 1. The median and mean surgical duration for the MIPS group was statistically lower than the linear group ( P = .0001). Implant stability measured by the RFA implant stability quotient was greater in the MIPS cohort. Conclusion: The MIPS approach seems either similar or superior to the linear approach in all perioperative outcomes evaluated. Outcomes such as surgical duration, anesthesia choice and implant stability measurements support implantation through the MIPS approach for patients meeting eligibility criteria.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".