ArticleClinical otolaryngology : official journal of ENT-UK ; official journal of Netherlands Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology & Cervico-Facial Surgery2026
The Bonebridge Active Bone Conduction Hearing Implant: Safety, Effectiveness and Outcomes Based on 355 Patients.
Article in Clinical otolaryngology : official journal of ENT-UK ; official journal of Netherlands Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology & Cervico-Facial Surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Brazilian Society of Otology Task Force - bone-anchored hearing system - recommendations based on strength of evidence.Brazilian journal of otorhinolaryngologyGuideline
- Outcomes of Bonebridge Implantation in 10 Patients with Rare Genetic Syndromes and Difficult Anatomy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- The Bonebridge Active Bone Conduction Hearing Implant: Safety, Effectiveness and Outcomes Based on 355 Patients.Clinical otolaryngology : official journal of ENT-UK ; official journal of Netherlands Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology & Cervico-Facial Surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study evaluates the safety and efficacy of the Bonebridge BCI 601 and 602 bone conduction implants in our largest cohort to date of 355 patients. The patients had a wide age range and exhibited conductive, mixed, or single-sided deafness (SSD).
designAll patients underwent Bonebridge implantation. Pre- and post-implantation evaluations included pure-tone audiometry, speech recognition tests, and free-field audiometry. Word recognition was measured using the Polish Monosyllabic Word Test, while speech reception in noise was assessed using the Polish Sentence Matrix Test. Subjective benefit was assessed using the APHAB questionnaire. Follow-up tests were performed 3-6 months after activation.
resultsRevision surgery was required in 17 patients (4.8%) due to complications, including implant removal in 5 cases. Reimplantation was successful in 4 of these. The APHAB questionnaire showed improved hearing function and all hearing tests also showed significant improvement.
conclusionActive bone conduction implantation is an effective method for the rehabilitation of conductive hearing loss, mixed hearing loss, and unilateral deafness. This large cohort study confirms significant hearing improvement and subjective benefits. The low complication rate supports the reliability of the Bonebridge system.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.