Active Middle Ear Implantation for Sensorineural Hearing Loss: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
- Journal
- Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology (Q1)
- Published
- 2 October 2026
- Study design
- Systematic review of cohort studies
- Evidence level
- Level 4, Very Low (CEBM 4)
- Authors
- Udi Shapira, Tal Lifshitz, Nidal Muhanna, Omer J Ungar
- PMID
- 42826367
- DOI
- 10.1097/MAO.0000000000005081
Why clinicians should know about it
- Picked for Otorhinolaryngology (paper of the day, 6 October 2026): Systematic review of Vibrant Soundbridge middle ear implant
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the audiological outcomes and safety profile of the Vibrant Soundbridge middle ear implant in patients with moderate-to-severe sensorineural hearing loss. Databases reviewed: PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, and the enrolled papers' reference lists. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. The database search yielded 194 articles, of which 48 underwent full-text review. The extracted data included age, sex, length of follow-up period and functional hearing gain. RESULTS: Twenty-three studies (917 ears) were included in the qualitative synthesis, of which 16 (648 ears) were suitable for quantitative meta-analysis. The mean (SD) preoperative pure-tone average was 56.69 (4.27) dB hearing level. The pooled mean functional gain was 24.29 dB (95% CI: 20.09-28.49; P<0.01) hearing level. There was high interstudy heterogeneity (I²=99%). The overall complication rate over a mean follow-up period of 23.2 months was 8.3%, and the revision surgery rate over the same follow-up period was 6.2%. Internal device failure occurred in 1.7% (n=7/413) cases. CONCLUSION: The Vibrant Soundbridge provided significant functional hearing gain and demonstrated a favorable safety profile in patients with moderate-to-severe sensorineural hearing loss. It affords a promising alternative for individuals who do not benefit from conventional hearing aids.
Abstract as published, via PubMed.
For healthcare professionals. The summary is generated by AI from the published abstract, and the evidence level is assigned automatically from the study design on the Oxford CEBM hierarchy. Neither is medical advice. Read the full paper before changing practice.