Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the Esteem Totally Implantable Hearing System in subjects suffering from mild to severe hearing loss.
Title: Esteem® Totally Implantable Hearing System Clinical Trial
Purpose: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the Esteem® Totally Implantable Hearing System (hereafter called the Esteem® System) in subjects suffering from mild to severe hearing loss.
Trial Design: This pivotal trial is designed as a prospective, multi-center, non-randomized, clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the Esteem® System. For this trial the subject will act as his or her own control.
This trial has been designed to meet the United States' regulatory requirements.
Enrollment Size: It is currently estimated that 50-60 subjects will be enrolled in this trial.
Subject Population: Adult subjects who have mild to severe sensorineural hearing loss, have a healthy middle ear, have a speech discrimination score of equal to or better than 40%, and have previously worn a hearing aid for a minimum of 3 months with an average daily use rate of at least 4 hours are eligible for inclusion in the trial. See detailed inclusion/exclusion criteria for specifics.
Primary Objectives:
To demonstrate that the Esteem® System improves the speech threshold of sensitivity for hearing and identifying speech signals as well as or better than the pre-implant hearing aid (aided condition).
Endpoint: Comparison of the speech reception threshold (SRT) using the Esteem® System (4 months post activation) as compared to the pre-implant aided condition.
To demonstrate that the Esteem® System at the 4 months post- activation visit is as effective as or better than the hearing aid for improving speech discrimination (intelligibility) as shown by the word recognition score at 50 dB.
Endpoint: Comparison of the word recognition score using the Esteem® at 4 months post-activation compared to the pre-implant aided condition.
To determine the incidence of Serious Adverse Device Effects (SADE) and the incidence rate of device failures and replacements.
Endpoint: The analysis of the incidence of SADEs and device failures and replacements at each follow-up.
To demonstrate that the subjects' cochlear function remains unchanged with the Esteem® System as shown by comparison of the subjects' pre-implant baseline bone conduction threshold versus the subjects' 4 month post-activation visit bone conduction threshold.
Endpoint: Comparison of bone conduction threshold (BC) using forehead placement at 4 months post activation compared to the pre-implant BC threshold.
Secondary Objectives:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Esteem Implant | Experimental | Subjects are implanted with the Esteem Totally Implantable Hearing System |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Esteem Totally Implantable Hearing System | Device | The Esteem System is a totally implantable hearing system designed to improve hearing in adult subjects suffering from mild to severe hearing loss that is sensorineural in origin. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| SRT Change | Comparison of the speech reception threshold (SRT) using the Esteem System as compared to the pre-implant aided condition | 4 Months Post Activation |
| SRT Change | Comparison of the speech reception threshold (SRT) using the Esteem System as compared to the pre-implant aided condition | 10 Months Post-Activation |
| Word Recognition Score Change | Comparison of the word recognition score using the Esteem compared to the pre-implant aided condition | 4 Months Post Activation |
| Word Recognition Score Change | Comparison of the word recognition score using the Esteem compared to the pre-implant aided condition | 10 Months Post Activation |
| SADEs | The incidence of Serious Adverse Device Effects (SADE) and the incidence rate of device failures and replacements | 10 Months Post-Activation |
| Assessment of Cochlear Function at 4-months and 10-months Post-activation, as Evidenced by Bone-conduction (BC) Thresholds. | Comparison of bone conduction thresholds at the 4-month and 10-month post-activation follow-up, relative to the pre-implant baseline bone conduction thresholds. Lower thresholds represent better (more sensitive) outcomes. | Baseline, 4-, and 10-Months Post-Activation |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Comparisons of Change in Global Score on Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) at 4 Months and at 10 Months Post-activation, Relative to Pre-implant Baseline Score | To assess whether the Esteem System improves Quality-of-Life, when compared to the baseline aided condition (pre-implant) as shown by the global Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) score. The APHAB is a 24-item self-assessment inventory in which patients report the amount of trouble they are having with communication in various everyday situations using a scale ranging from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating less difficulty (or increased benefit). The Global Score is the average of 3 subscales. Scores reported here are calculated by comparing the patient's reported difficulty in the baseline "unaided" condition with their amount of difficulty when using amplification (hearing aids or implant) -- i.e. Global Scores at pre-implant baseline subtracted from scores at aided baseline and at 4 and 10 months post-implant. Positive numbers denote increased benefit relative to unaided baseline, and the higher the number, the greater the benefit. |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Freq (Hz) 500 1000 2000 3000 4000 LL* (dB HL) 30 35 35 35 35 UL* (dB HL) 100 100 100 100 100
*LL = Lower Level; UL = Upper Level
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Jack A. Shohet, M.D. | Principal Investigator | |
| Eric M. Kraus, M.D., M.S. | F.A.C.S. | Principal Investigator |
| Peter J. Catalano, M.D. | F.A.C.S. | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian | Newport Beach | California | 92658 | United States | ||
| Shohet Ear Associates |
Not provided
| Label | URL |
|---|---|
| Envoy Medical Corporation Official Web Site | View source |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Subjects were recruited at three different sites:
The Ear Center of Greensboro Greensboro, NC 27401
Shohet Ear Associates Medical Group, Inc. Newport Beach, CA 92663
Lahey Clinic Burlington, MA 01805
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| FG000 | Esteem Implant | Subjects are implanted with the Esteem Totally Implantable Hearing System Esteem Totally Implantable Hearing System: The Esteem System is a totally implantable hearing system designed to improve hearing in adult subjects suffering from mild to severe hearing loss that is sensorineural in origin. |
| Title | Milestones | Reasons Not Completed | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study |
|
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BG000 | Esteem Implant | Subjects implanted with the Esteem Totally Implantable Hearing System |
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
| Title | Description | Population Description | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Denominator Units Selected | Denominators | Classes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | Mean |
| Type | Title | Description | Population Description | Reporting Status | Anticipated Posting Date | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Time Frame | Units Analyzed | Denominator Units Selected | Arm/Group Information | Denominators | Classes | Analyses | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | SRT Change | Comparison of the speech reception threshold (SRT) using the Esteem System as compared to the pre-implant aided condition | Posted | Mean | Standard Error | dB | 4 Months Post Activation |
|
|
Cumulative through 10 Month Post-Activation
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description | Deaths (Affected) | Deaths (At Risk) | Serious Events (Affected) | Serious Events (At Risk) | Other Events (Affected) | Other Events (At Risk) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EG000 | Esteem Implant | Subjects implanted with the Esteem Totally Implantable Hearing System Esteem Totally Implantable Hearing System: The Esteem System is a totally implantable hearing system designed to improve hearing in adult subjects suffering from mild to severe hearing loss that is sensorineural in origin. |
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Limited benefit | Ear and labyrinth disorders | Systematic Assessment |
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chorda Tympani/Taste Disturbance | Nervous system disorders | Systematic Assessment |
Not provided
| Title | Organization | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elizabeth Anderson, PhD | Envoy Medical Corp. | 651-361-8080 | landerson@envoymedical.com |
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D034381 | Hearing Loss |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D006311 | Hearing Disorders |
| D004427 | Ear Diseases |
| D010038 | Otorhinolaryngologic Diseases |
| D012678 | Sensation Disorders |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| 4 and 10 Months Post-Activation |
| Scores on Esteem Questionnaire | To gain subject feedback on the use of the Esteem System relative to their pre-implant hearing aid (aided condition) as shown by the (unvalidated) Esteem Questionnaire. Subjects completed a 7-item questionnaire rating various subjective attributes concerning their experience with Esteem as compared to their previous hearing aid. Ratings were on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is "much worse," 3 is the same and 5 is "much better." Reported here are proportions of participants responding to each score (1 to 5) on the scale, for average scores across all 7 items for each subject. | 4 and 10 Months Post Activation |
| Change in Pure Tone Average (PTA) at 4 Months, Relative to Baseline Pre-implant | For each subject, the 4-month post-activation Air Conduction PTA (average of thresholds at three frequencies: 500, 1000, and 2000 Hz) was compared to the baseline unaided PTA. A negative mean difference (in dB) from baseline indicates improved hearing sensitivity with the Esteem, relative to baseline. | 4 Months Post Activation |
| Difference in QuickSIN (Quick Speech-In-Noise Test) Score at 4 Months Relative to Baseline Aided Condition | The Quick-SIN is a test of sentence recognition in varying levels of background noise. The score achieved is termed "SNR loss," and a higher score indicates poorer performance on the test. "SNR Loss" is defined as the dB increase in signal-to-noise ratio required by a hearing-impaired person to understand speech in noise, compared to someone with normal hearing. (The range of possible scores is -4.5 to 25.5, with lower scores indicating better performance.) For this study, baseline scores for each subject are subtracted from 4 month scores, providing a difference score. The mean difference across subjects is reported here, with 0 meaning no change and a negative difference indicating better performance with Esteem, compared to the pre-implant aided condition. | 4 Months Post Activation |
| Newport Beach |
| California |
| 92663 |
| United States |
| Lahey Clinic, Inc. | Burlington | Massachusetts | 01805 | United States |
| Surgical Care Affiliates | Greensboro | North Carolina | 27401 | United States |
| The Ear Center of Greensboro | Greensboro | North Carolina | 27401 | United States |
| years |
|
| Sex: Female, Male | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Race (NIH/OMB) | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
|
| Primary | SRT Change | Comparison of the speech reception threshold (SRT) using the Esteem System as compared to the pre-implant aided condition | Posted | Mean | Standard Error | dB | 10 Months Post-Activation |
|
|
|
| Primary | Word Recognition Score Change | Comparison of the word recognition score using the Esteem compared to the pre-implant aided condition | Posted | Mean | Standard Error | change in % correct | 4 Months Post Activation |
|
|
|
| Primary | Word Recognition Score Change | Comparison of the word recognition score using the Esteem compared to the pre-implant aided condition | Posted | Mean | Standard Error | change in % correct | 10 Months Post Activation |
|
|
|
| Primary | SADEs | The incidence of Serious Adverse Device Effects (SADE) and the incidence rate of device failures and replacements | Includes all events, cumulatively, from enrollment through 10-month followup | Posted | Number | events | 10 Months Post-Activation |
|
|
|
| Primary | Assessment of Cochlear Function at 4-months and 10-months Post-activation, as Evidenced by Bone-conduction (BC) Thresholds. | Comparison of bone conduction thresholds at the 4-month and 10-month post-activation follow-up, relative to the pre-implant baseline bone conduction thresholds. Lower thresholds represent better (more sensitive) outcomes. | 4-month and 10-month BC PTA (average 500, 1kHz, 2kHz) compared to baseline BC PTA | Posted | Mean | Standard Error | dB HL | Baseline, 4-, and 10-Months Post-Activation |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Comparisons of Change in Global Score on Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) at 4 Months and at 10 Months Post-activation, Relative to Pre-implant Baseline Score | To assess whether the Esteem System improves Quality-of-Life, when compared to the baseline aided condition (pre-implant) as shown by the global Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) score. The APHAB is a 24-item self-assessment inventory in which patients report the amount of trouble they are having with communication in various everyday situations using a scale ranging from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating less difficulty (or increased benefit). The Global Score is the average of 3 subscales. Scores reported here are calculated by comparing the patient's reported difficulty in the baseline "unaided" condition with their amount of difficulty when using amplification (hearing aids or implant) -- i.e. Global Scores at pre-implant baseline subtracted from scores at aided baseline and at 4 and 10 months post-implant. Positive numbers denote increased benefit relative to unaided baseline, and the higher the number, the greater the benefit. | Data from entire subject cohort not available. | Posted | Mean | Standard Error | score on a scale | 4 and 10 Months Post-Activation |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Scores on Esteem Questionnaire | To gain subject feedback on the use of the Esteem System relative to their pre-implant hearing aid (aided condition) as shown by the (unvalidated) Esteem Questionnaire. Subjects completed a 7-item questionnaire rating various subjective attributes concerning their experience with Esteem as compared to their previous hearing aid. Ratings were on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is "much worse," 3 is the same and 5 is "much better." Reported here are proportions of participants responding to each score (1 to 5) on the scale, for average scores across all 7 items for each subject. | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | 4 and 10 Months Post Activation |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Change in Pure Tone Average (PTA) at 4 Months, Relative to Baseline Pre-implant | For each subject, the 4-month post-activation Air Conduction PTA (average of thresholds at three frequencies: 500, 1000, and 2000 Hz) was compared to the baseline unaided PTA. A negative mean difference (in dB) from baseline indicates improved hearing sensitivity with the Esteem, relative to baseline. | Posted | Mean | Standard Error | dB | 4 Months Post Activation |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Difference in QuickSIN (Quick Speech-In-Noise Test) Score at 4 Months Relative to Baseline Aided Condition | The Quick-SIN is a test of sentence recognition in varying levels of background noise. The score achieved is termed "SNR loss," and a higher score indicates poorer performance on the test. "SNR Loss" is defined as the dB increase in signal-to-noise ratio required by a hearing-impaired person to understand speech in noise, compared to someone with normal hearing. (The range of possible scores is -4.5 to 25.5, with lower scores indicating better performance.) For this study, baseline scores for each subject are subtracted from 4 month scores, providing a difference score. The mean difference across subjects is reported here, with 0 meaning no change and a negative difference indicating better performance with Esteem, compared to the pre-implant aided condition. | Posted | Mean | Standard Error | score on a scale | 4 Months Post Activation |
|
|
|
| 6 |
| 57 |
| 43 |
| 57 |
| Incision Breakdown | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Pain and Facial Weakness | Nervous system disorders | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Ear effusion/fluid | Ear and labyrinth disorders | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Tinnitus | Ear and labyrinth disorders | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Dizziness/vertigo | Ear and labyrinth disorders | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Incision discomfort/breakdown | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Ear pain | Ear and labyrinth disorders | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Facial weakness/paralysis | Nervous system disorders | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Headache/Pain (post-op) | General disorders | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Ear cracking/roaring | Ear and labyrinth disorders | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Otitis externa/TM | Ear and labyrinth disorders | Systematic Assessment |
|
Not provided
Not provided
| D009461 |
| Neurologic Manifestations |
| D009422 | Nervous System Diseases |
| D012816 | Signs and Symptoms |
| D013568 | Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms |
| Title | Measurements |
|---|---|
|
|
| 10 mo. Global Score with Esteem |
|
|
| Title | Measurements |
|---|---|
|
| Response "4" - 4 mo |
|
| Response "5" - 4 mo |
|
| Response "1" - 10 mo ave across items |
|
| Response "2" - 10 mo |
|
| Response "3" - 10 mo |
|
| Response "4" - 10 mo |
|
| Response "5" - 10 mo |
|
| Response Missing - 10 mo |
|