Comparison of soft tissue preservation techniques for BAHA insertion in 41 patients: ‘Bus‐stop' (open approach) vs MIPS (minimally invasive approach)
Alex Bennett  Rupali Sawant
First published: 30 July 2019 https://doi.org/10.1111/coa.13409
This article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as doi: 10.1111/coa.13409
ePDFPDFTOOLS SHARE
Abstract
Several studies have reported improved outcomes with soft tissue preservation, minimally invasive or ‘punch' techniques when compared to soft tissue reduction

The only two studies comparing a minimally invasive or ‘punch' techniques with soft tissue reduction demonstrate no evidence of reduced implant loss

This is the first study to directly compare the 12 month outcomes of two non soft tissue reduction techniques performed by a single surgeon

MIPS demonstrated a statistically significant increase in implant loss compared to the ‘Bus‐stop' approach while failing to achieve better healing, hearing or patient satisfaction

Implant loss appeared the result of failure of osseointegration due to a combination of unseen soft tissue interposition, which occurs between removal of the cannular and placing the implant, and overheating of the bone during drilling as a result of the lack of continuous saline irrigation