Differences in clinical characteristics and prognosis of sudden low- and high-frequency hearing loss

The construction and validation of prognostic prediction model for sudden sensorineural hearing loss in middle-aged and elderly people

OBJECTIVE

Idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSNHL), as an otologic emergency, is commonly encountered and its prevalence has been climbing every year recently. To our knowledge, the prognosis of middle-aged and elderly patients is worse than that of young patients. Previous researches mainly focused on the adult population, which was considered as prognostic models who performed hearing recovery in ISSNHL. However, few studies regarding the middle-aged and elderly population who are regarded as prognostic models have been reported. Therefore, we aim to construct and validate a nomogram-based prognostic prediction model, which can provide a reference for the prognostic assessment in the middle-aged and elderly patients with ISSNHL.

METHOD

A total of 371 middle-aged and elderly ISSNHL patients who were admitted to the Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Yanbian Hospital, Yanbian University, from April 2018 to April 2023 were enrolled in the study. All subjects were randomly divided into two groups including training group (n = 263) and validation group (n = 108). Lasso regression and multi-factor logistic regression were jointly utilized to screen out prognosis-related independent risk factors and establish a nomogram-based risk prediction model. The accuracy and clinical application value of the model were evaluated by combining the Bootstrapping method and k-fold cross-validation, plotting the receiver operating characteristic  (ROC)  curve, calculating the area under the ROC curve (AUC), plotting the decision curve analysis (DCA), and the calibrating curve.

RESULT

We used the method of lasso regression combined with multivariate logistic regression and finally screened out eight predictors (including age, number of affected ears, degree of hearing loss, type of hearing curve, duration of disease, presence of vertigo, diabetes, and lacunar cerebral infarction) that were included into the nomogram. The C-index were 0.823 [95% CI (0.725, 0.921)] and 0.851 [95% CI (0.701, 1.000)], and the AUC values were 0.812 and 0.823 for the training and validation groups, respectively. The calibration curve for the validation group was approximately conformed to that for the modeling group, indicating favorable model calibration. The DCA results revealed the modeling group (3%-86%) and the validation group (2%-92%) showed significant net clinical benefit under the majority of thresholds.

CONCLUSION

This study developed and validated a nomogram-based prognostic prediction model which based on the eight independent risk factors mentioned above. The predictors are conveniently accessible and may assist clinicians in formulating individualized treatment strategies.

Predictive Model for Prognosis of Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss by Nomogram

Objective: To explore the prognostic factors of patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL), analyze the possible influencing factors, and construct a nomogram for personalized evaluation of their prognosis. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on 269 patients with SSNHL. The prognostic factors were analyzed by univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression analysis. The nomogram was constructed based on the results of multivariate logistic regression analysis, and the model was verified by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, calibration curve, and decision curve analysis (DCA). Results: Among the 269 patients hospitalized, 136 cases were improved (44 cases were cured, 28 cases were markedly effective, 64 cases were effective) and 133 cases were ineffective. After univariate analysis, it was found that age, duration from onset to treatment, audiometric configuration, serum albumin (ALB), and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) were associated with hearing outcomes. Duration from onset to treatment and audiometric configuration were independent risk factors when the treatment outcome was divided into ineffective, effective, significant improvement, and complete recovery groups or divided into improvement and ineffective groups after multivariate logistic regression analysis. The factors according to univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression analysis results were included in the nomogram to construct the prediction models. The area under the ROC curve of model discrimination was 0.752 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.695-0.808] when the treatment outcome was divided into 2 groups. The calibration curve showed the consistency of the results, and the DCA prediction curve showed good clinical efficacy. The C-index was 0.756 (95% CI: 0.710-0.802) when the treatment outcome was divided into 4 groups. Conclusion: Age, duration from onset to treatment, audiometric configuration, ALB, and NLR are influencing factors for SSNHL. Duration from onset to treatment and audiometric configuration are independent risk factors for SSNHL. The nomogram presents the prognosis of patients with SSNHL in an intuitive, visual, and readable graph, providing clinicians with a personalized assessment.

Clinical Factors Associated With Prognosis of Tinnitus and Aural Fullness After Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss

OBJECTIVES

We evaluated the long-term prognosis and risk factors associated with tinnitus and aural fullness, which occurred with sudden sensorineural hearing loss.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cross-sectional review.

SETTING

Tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS

Those who visited our clinic for sudden hearing loss from January 2016 to May 2020, diagnosed with sudden sensorineural hearing loss based on pure-tone audiometry, and underwent magnetic resonance imaging to rule out other cause of hearing loss. In total, 106 patients were enrolled in this study.

INTERVENTION

All patients were treated with oral glucocorticoids. Salvage intratympanic dexamethasone injection therapy was performed for the patients whose hearing was not fully recovered.

MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES

We scored the loudness of tinnitus and the intensity of aural fullness using the numerical rating scale. We used a mixed-effects model for repeatedly measured tinnitus and aural fullness scores.

RESULTS

The time after the onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL; β = -0.07; 95% confidence interval, -0.09 to -0.05; p < 0.001) and hearing outcome after treatment (overall p = 0.003) were significant factors associated with the prognosis of tinnitus. Concerning aural fullness, the time after the onset of SSNHL was a significant prognosis factor (β = -0.08; 95% confidence interval, -0.09 to -0.06; p < 0.001), unlike hearing outcome (overall p = 0.261). Pretreatment pure-tone audiometry average threshold and mainly affected frequencies were not significant factors for tinnitus and aural fullness recovery, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The persistence of tinnitus with SSNHL was significantly affected by hearing recovery after treatment, whereas aural fullness was not associated with hearing recovery. However, both symptoms were improved over time after SSNHL.

Clinical characteristics and prognosis of acute low-frequency hearing loss and ascending sensorineural sudden sensorineural hearing loss

Objective

The present study aimed to explore the pathogenesis of the ascending sudden sensorineural hearing (SSNHL) loss by comparing the clinical characteristics and prognosis of acute low-frequency hearing loss (ALFHL) and ascending SSNHL.

Methods

A total of 43 patients with ALFHL and 122 patients with ascending SSNHL were enrolled in this study. First, the prognosis of patients with ALFHL and ascending SSNHL were compared, and the prognostic factors of AFHL and ascending SSNHL were analyzed.

Results

Acute low-frequency hearing loss and ascending SSNHL have no remarkable difference in complete recovery rate. Compared to ascending SSNHL, ALFHL has younger onset age, female prevalence, lower hearing threshold, shorter time from onset to recovery, and a lower proportion of combined tinnitus. The PTA at admission and delay from onset to therapy were significantly related to the prognosis of patients with ascending SSNHL, while only delay from onset to therapy was significantly related to the prognosis of patients with ALFHL. The majority of patients with ascending SSNHL and ALFHL recovered completely within 10 days from onset.

Conclusion

Audiogram shape plays a critical role in the prognosis of SSNHL. Ascending SSNHL and ALFHL may share a common pathological mechanism.

Intratympanic corticosteroids for sudden sensorineural hearing loss

BACKGROUND

Idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSNHL) is common, and defined as a sudden decrease in sensorineural hearing sensitivity of unknown aetiology. Systemic corticosteroids are widely used, however their value remains unclear. Intratympanic injections of corticosteroids have become increasingly common in the treatment of ISSNHL.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of intratympanic corticosteroids in people with ISSNHL.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Trials Register; CENTRAL (2021, Issue 9); PubMed; Ovid Embase; CINAHL; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials (search date 23 September 2021).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving people with ISSNHL and follow-up of over a week. Intratympanic corticosteroids were given as primary or secondary treatment (after failure of systemic therapy).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods, including GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. Our primary outcome was change in hearing threshold with pure tone audiometry. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of people whose hearing improved, final hearing threshold, speech audiometry, frequency-specific hearing changes and adverse effects.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 30 studies, comprising 2133 analysed participants. Some studies had more than two treatment arms and were therefore relevant to several comparisons. Studies investigated intratympanic corticosteroids as either primary (initial) therapy or secondary (rescue) therapy after failure of initial treatment. 1. Intratympanic corticosteroids versus systemic corticosteroids as primary therapy We identified 16 studies (1108 participants). Intratympanic therapy may result in little to no improvement in the change in hearing threshold (mean difference (MD) -5.93 dB better, 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.61 to -4.26; 10 studies; 701 participants; low-certainty). We found little to no difference in the proportion of participants whose hearing was improved (risk ratio (RR) 1.04, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.12; 14 studies; 972 participants; moderate-certainty). Intratympanic therapy may result in little to no difference in the final hearing threshold (MD -3.31 dB, 95% CI -6.16 to -0.47; 7 studies; 516 participants; low-certainty). Intratympanic therapy may increase the number of people who experience vertigo or dizziness (RR 2.53, 95% CI 1.41 to 4.54; 1 study; 250 participants; low-certainty) and probably increases the number of people with ear pain (RR 15.68, 95% CI 6.22 to 39.49; 2 studies; 289 participants; moderate-certainty). It also resulted in persistent tympanic membrane perforation (range 0% to 3.9%; 3 studies; 359 participants; very low-certainty), vertigo/dizziness at the time of injection (1% to 21%, 3 studies; 197 participants; very low-certainty) and ear pain at the time of injection (10.5% to 27.1%; 2 studies; 289 participants; low-certainty). 2. Intratympanic plus systemic corticosteroids (combined therapy) versus systemic corticosteroids alone as primary therapy We identified 10 studies (788 participants). Combined therapy may have a small effect on the change in hearing threshold (MD -8.55 dB better, 95% CI -12.48 to -4.61; 6 studies; 435 participants; low-certainty). The evidence is very uncertain as to whether combined therapy changes the proportion of participants whose hearing is improved (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.41; 10 studies; 788 participants; very low-certainty). Combined therapy may result in slightly lower (more favourable) final hearing thresholds but the evidence is very uncertain, and it is not clear whether the change would be important to patients (MD -9.11 dB, 95% CI -16.56 to -1.67; 3 studies; 194 participants; very low-certainty). Some adverse effects only occurred in those who received combined therapy. These included persistent tympanic membrane perforation (range 0% to 5.5%; 5 studies; 474 participants; very low-certainty), vertigo or dizziness at the time of injection (range 0% to 8.1%; 4 studies; 341 participants; very low-certainty) and ear pain at the time of injection (13.5%; 1 study; 73 participants; very low-certainty).  3. Intratympanic corticosteroids versus no treatment or placebo as secondary therapy We identified seven studies (279 participants). Intratympanic therapy may have a small effect on the change in hearing threshold (MD -9.07 dB better, 95% CI -11.47 to -6.66; 7 studies; 280 participants; low-certainty). Intratympanic therapy may result in a much higher proportion of participants whose hearing is improved (RR 5.55, 95% CI 2.89 to 10.68; 6 studies; 232 participants; low-certainty). Intratympanic therapy may result in lower (more favourable) final hearing thresholds (MD -11.09 dB, 95% CI -17.46 to -4.72; 5 studies; 203 participants; low-certainty). Some adverse effects only occurred in those who received intratympanic injection. These included persistent tympanic membrane perforation (range 0% to 4.2%; 5 studies; 185 participants; very low-certainty), vertigo or dizziness at the time of injection (range 6.7% to 33%; 3 studies; 128 participants; very low-certainty) and ear pain at the time of injection (0%; 1 study; 44 participants; very low-certainty).  4. Intratympanic plus systemic corticosteroids (combined therapy) versus systemic corticosteroids alone as secondary therapy We identified one study with 76 participants. Change in hearing threshold was not reported. Combined therapy may result in a higher proportion with hearing improvement, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 2.24, 95% CI 1.10 to 4.55; very low-certainty). Adverse effects were poorly reported with only data for persistent tympanic membrane perforation (rate 8.1%, very low-certainty).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Most of the evidence in this review is low- or very low-certainty, therefore it is likely that further studies may change our conclusions.   For primary therapy, intratympanic corticosteroids may have little or no effect compared with systemic corticosteroids. There may be a slight benefit from combined treatment when compared with systemic treatment alone, but the evidence is uncertain. For secondary therapy, there is low-certainty evidence that intratympanic corticosteroids, when compared to no treatment or placebo, may result in a much higher proportion of participants whose hearing is improved, but may only have a small effect on the change in hearing threshold. It is very uncertain whether there is additional benefit from combined treatment over systemic steroids alone. Although adverse effects were poorly reported, the different risk profiles of intratympanic treatment (including tympanic membrane perforation, pain and dizziness/vertigo) and systemic treatment (for example, blood glucose problems) should be considered when selecting appropriate treatment.

[Association of sudden sensorineural hearing loss and its prognosis with the brain white matter hyperintensity]

Objective:To explore the relationship between white matter hyperintensity（WMH） and sudden sensorineural hearing loss（SSHL） and evaluate the influence of WMH on the prognosis of SSHL. Methods:Fifty hospitalized unilateral SSHL patients and 50 age and gender matched routine physical examination individuals without SSHL history from June 2019 to June 2020 were included for a case-control study. All included subjects underwent 3.0 Tesla cranial magnetic resonance examination, and the Fazekas scale was applied to evaluate periventricular white matter hyperintense（PVWMH） and deep white matter hyperintense（DWMH）. Fazekas score and distribution proportions of Fazekas score was compared between SSHL and control. Ordered logistic regression was used to study the relationship between prognosis of SSHL and WMH. Results:The Fazekas score of WMH in SSHL group was significantly higher than that of control group（PVWMH: P=0.004, DWMH: P=0.010）; There was a significant difference in the distribution proportions of Fazekas scores between SSHL and control（PVWMH: P=0.036, DWMH: P=0.047）; The results of ordered logistic regression showed that patients without WMH（Fazekas=0） is an independent predictor of good prognosis in SSHL（P=0.025, OR=12.779）. Conclusion:The prevalence of WMH in SSHL patients was higher than that of control. SSHL patients without WMH has a better prognosis than those with WMH.

Combination Immunosuppressive Therapy in Primary Autoimmune Inner Ear Disease in Pregnancy

Objective. Autoimmune inner ear disease (AIED) is a rare disorder characterized by rapidly progressive, sensorineural hearing loss that demonstrates good responsiveness to corticosteroid and immunosuppressive therapy. The pathophysiology is likely driven by chronic trafficking of immune cells into the inner ear, targeting inner ear proteins to coordinate inflammation. Suppression or modulation of the immune response can minimize cochleitis allowing for potential recovery of hearing. It is an otologic emergency requiring a multidisciplinary approach to management to commence immunosuppressive therapy. This can be achieved using steroids, immunomodulators, plasmapheresis, intravenous immunoglobulin, or biologic agents. Treatment decisions are further complicated in pregnancy and require supervision by an obstetrician and maternal-fetal medicine (MFM) specialist. Concerns include safe dosing of steroids and potential for transplacental migration of immune complexes. We provide the first comprehensive literature review on AIED and its implications in pregnancy. We frame our discussion in the context of the second reported case of primary AIED in pregnancy and the first to show excellent response to immunosuppressive therapy. Methods. We reviewed the presented case and literature on AIED. Results. A 27-year-old, pregnant, HSP-70 positive woman was diagnosed with AIED and had excellent recovery of hearing and balance following a combination of steroid treatment, augmented by oral immunomodulators, plasmapheresis, and IVIG. Conclusion. AIED is a diagnostic challenge, and treatment considerations are complex when encountered in pregnancy. Management requires multidisciplinary involvement between otolaryngologists, immunologists, and obstetricians to balance maternal and fetal health outcomes.

Audiological characteristics and exploratory treatment of a rare condition of acute-otitis-media-associated sudden sensorineural hearing loss

BACKGROUND

Acute otitis media (AOM) is a common disease that is more prevalent in children. Most studies concerning AOM-associated sudden sensorineural hearing loss are case reports and retrospective in nature, hence the etiology of AOM-associated sudden hearing loss has not been fully established.

AIM

To analyze audiological characteristics of AOM-associated sudden hearing loss and evaluate efficacy of combined tympanostomy tube placement (TTP) and intratympanic methylprednisolone.

METHODS

Eight adult patients who were diagnosed with AOM-associated sudden hearing loss and ineffectively treated by conventional medical therapy were enrolled in this study. Basic data were collected, and pure tone audiometry was performed to assess the audiological characteristics. Combination therapy with TTP and intratympanic methylprednisolone injection was given to the patients.

RESULTS

Mixed or sensorineural hearing loss was observed at high frequencies (2–4 kHz). All the cases in this study were cured after TTP and intratympanic methylprednisolone. After treatment, the average hearing threshold at affected frequencies was significantly lower than those in the pretreatment group (P < 0.05) and was similar to that in the healthy ears (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

AOM rarely induces sudden sensorineural hearing loss. Combination therapy with TTP and intratympanic methylprednisolone injection may be effective after failure of conventional medical treatment.

Optimal First-Line Therapy for Acute Low-Tone Sensorineural Hearing loss

Background and Objectives

We aimed to analyze treatment outcomes following different initial management approaches and confirm treatment regimens for acute low-tone sensorineural hearing loss (ALHL) that would yield the best results.

Subjects and Methods

We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of 106 patients with ALHL who visited a university hospital’s otology clinic from March 2013 to June 2019. Pure-tone averages at the initial visit and at 2 and 4 weeks after the initial visit were evaluated.

Results

Forty-nine patients were enrolled in this study; of them, 41 (83.7%) exhibited complete recovery (CR) at 2 weeks and 43 (87.8%) exhibited CR at 1 month after the initial visit. Regression analysis revealed that CR at 2 weeks after the initial visit was associated with diuretic use [Exp(B): 10.309, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.007-100]. An initial daily low-dose steroid use was marginally significant [Exp(B): 1.042, 95% CI: 0.997-1.092; p=0.066]. Isolated diuretic use [Exp(B): 25.641, 95% CI: 1.121-90.909; p=0.039] was an independent, good prognostic factor at 1 month after the initial visit. However, other treatment regimens did not affect the final results.

Conclusions

A combination of initial daily administration of ≤30 mg prednisolone plus diuretics was sufficient as the first-line treatment for ALHL. High-dose steroids and salvage intratympanic steroid injections can be applied as a second choice; however, the predicted outcome would not be good in that case.

Clinical characteristics and correlation between hearing outcomes after different episodes of recurrent idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss

OBJECTIVES

Recurrent idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSNHL) is a rare disease. In this study, we evaluated the correlations between hearing recovery after the first and recurrent episodes of ISSNHL and characterized the clinical features of different episodes of ISSNHL.

METHODS

This retrospective study was conducted by reviewing medical records pertaining to the period 2008-2018. A total of 30 patients (16 male, 14 female) who had experienced at least two episodes of ISSNHL were included. All patients were had received steroid therapy (including systemic and IT) and/or hyperbaric oxygen therapy within 2 weeks after the onset of disease. The SDRG's criteria was used for the grading of hearing recovery.

RESULTS

The median age at the first and second episode of ISSNHL was 48 and 53.5 years, respectively; a total of 30% of patients presented with vertigo in the first episode and 40% presented with vertigo in the second episode. The hearing outcomes of both episodes showed significant improvement after treatment. The rate of complete recovery after the first and second episodes was 46.67% and 33.33%, respectively. A significant positive correlation was observed between the treatment outcomes of the first and second episodes (r = 0.721, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In ISSNHL, hearing recovery after a recurrent episode is significantly correlated with the hearing outcome after the initial episode (p = 0.042). The treatment outcome of the first episode is a prognostic factor for the outcomes of recurrent episodes.

Characteristics and prognosis of idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss in aged people: a retrospective study

Background: Few studies focused on the prognosis of sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSHL) of aged people. Objectives: The aim of this study is to analyze the characteristics, treatment, and prognostic factors of ISSHL in aged people. Material and methods: A total of 278 patients diagnosed of ISSHL in aged people from 2014 to 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Univariates were analyzed by univariate and multivariate logistic analysis. Results: Among the 13 univariates, the patients' age was younger in the overall recovery group ORG (p = .018), while onset days was shorter in ORG (p = .000). The percentage of DM and HTN comorbidities were higher in ORG (p = .026 and .038). Meanwhile differences were significant in audiogram configurations (p = .037), the degree of hearing loss (p = .033), and types of lipid treatment (p = .020). Then these seven independent risk factors were included in the multivariate analysis, final results indicated that hypertension (p = .028), lipid control groups (p = .009), age (p = .000), and onset days (p = .001) were related to the treatment outcome of ISSHL. Conclusions: The prognosis of ISSHL in aged patients was closely related to age, the onset days of treatment, and good control of complications such as hypertension and hyperlipidemia, so vascular factors were considered as the main causes of morbidity.

Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss Following Wasp Sting and Successful Treatment With Intratympanic Steroids

Objective:

A sting by a Vespula vulgaris (wasp) should be considered as a cause of sudden sensorineural hearing loss. Although the mechanism of this cause is not well understood, management approach is similar to idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss.

Methods:

We describe a novel case of sudden sensorineural hearing loss encountered at a community otolaryngology clinic. It developed in a 26-year-old man after a sting to the ear canal by a V vulgaris (wasp) species.

Results:

The patient failed to respond to oral steroids, but had complete recovery to normal hearing levels with intratympanic steroids.

Conclusions:

Sudden sensorineural hearing loss can be caused by the sting of a V vulgaris species and may be resolved with the use intratympanic steroids.

Air pollution increases the risk of SSNHL: A nested case-control study using meteorological data and national sample cohort data

This study aimed to evaluate the impact of weather conditions and air pollution on the onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL). The Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service - National Sample Cohort (HIRA-NSC) from 2002 through 2013 was used. A total of 5,200 participants with SSNHL were matched 1:4 for age, sex, income, region of residence, hypertension, diabetes, and dyslipidemia with 20,800 control participants. Meteorological data included daily mean temperature (°C), daily highest temperature (°C), daily lowest temperature (°C), daily temperature difference (°C), relative humidity (%), ambient atmospheric pressure (hPa), pressure, SO₂ (ppm), NO₂ (ppm), O₃ (ppm), CO (ppm), and PM₁₀ (μg/m³) of a mean of 60 days, 30 days, 14 days, 7 days, and 3 days before SSNHL were analyzed. Hourly measurements were taken from 94 places to assess the temperature, humidity, and atmospheric pressure and from 273 places to determine SO₂, NO₂, O₃, CO, and PM₁₀. Crude and adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of meteorological data for SSNHL were analyzed using unconditional logistic regression analyses. Subgroup analyses were conducted by age and sex. The mean NO₂ and O₃ concentrations 14 days before the index date were different in the SSNHL group compared to those in the control group (P < 0.001 for NO₂ and P = 0.021 for O₃). The adjusted 14-day OR for NO₂ (0.1 ppm) exposure was 3.12 in the SSNHL group compared to that in the control group (95% CI = 2.16–4.49, P < 0.001). The increased odds of NO₂ exposure for 14 days in the SSNHL group persisted in the age group older than 30 years for both sexes. Other meteorological conditions did not show differences between the SSNHL and control groups. SSNHL was associated with high concentrations of NO_2.

Significance of 1 kHz Pure-tone Threshold in Acute Low-frequency Sensorineural Hearing Loss

OBJECTIVES

To analyze risk factors for acute low-frequency hearing loss (ALFHL), and compare treatment outcomes in the presence or absence of such risk factors.

STUDY DESIGN

A case series featuring retrospective chart review.

SETTING

An academic university hospital.

PATIENTS

We included 170 ALFHL patients without vertigo. All of the patients received one of four treatments: low-dose steroid (LD-steroid), high-dose steroid (HD-steroid), LD-steroid and diuretics (LD-combination therapy), and ITDI (intratympanic dexamethasone injection) and diuretics (ITDI-combination therapy). To identify risk factors, we reviewed the clinical features of patients such as age, sex, chief complaint, accompanying symptoms, diabetes, hypertension, time from disease onset, the extent of hearing loss, treatment methods, and 1 kHz involvement.

INTERVENTIONS

ALFHL was diagnosed based on the average hearing loss >30 dB at 250 and 500 Hz.

RESULTS

The overall rates of hearing recovery were 70-80% in the four treatment groups. In terms of the prognosis of ALFHL patients, we found that a longer time from disease onset and 1 kHz involvement were independent risk factors for poor prognosis. In addition, we compared treatment outcomes of four treatment methods in the presence or absence of risk factors. In ALFHL patients with risk factors, we found statistically significant differences (p = 0.042) among treatment methods; effectiveness ranged in the order if ITDI-combination therapy, LD-combination therapy, HD-steroid, and LD-steroid.

CONCLUSIONS

Risk factors for poor hearing recovery in ALFHL included longer symptom duration and 1 kHz involvement. In ALFHL with such risk factors, combination therapy was more effective than oral steroid therapy.

Comparison of intratympanic dexamethasone therapy and hyperbaric oxygen therapy for the salvage treatment of refractory high-frequency sudden sensorineural hearing loss

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the efficacy of intratympanic dexamethasone (ITD) therapy and hyperbaric oxygen(HBO) therapy for the salvage treatment of patients with high-frequency sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL) after the failure of conventional therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

104 refractory high-frequency SSNHL patients were enrolled in our study. Among them, 31 received ITD alone (ITD group), 32 received HBO alone (HBO group) and 41 received no salvage therapies (control group). Hearing outcomes were determined by pure-tone average measured by audiometry. The total effective rates in the hearing recovery and improvement of tinnitus were calculated before and after salvage treatment.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference of the total effective rates in the hearing recovery between ITD and HBO group (p = 0.368). However, ITD therapy showed much better improvements of tinnitus than HBO therapy (p = 0.039). After ITD and HBO therapy, there were no significant differences in hearing gains at 2 and 4 KHz between ITD and HBO group (p = 0.468 and 0.934, respectively). Nevertheless, ITD therapy showed significant improvements of hearing gains at 8 KHz (p = 0.049) compared to that of HBO therapy.

CONCLUSION

ITD therapy may have better improvements of tinnitus and hearing gains at 8 KHz than HBO therapy in patients with refractory high-frequency SSNHL.

Update on consensus on diagnosis and treatment of idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss

INTRODUCTION

Idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSNHL) is a sudden, unexplained unilateral hearing loss.

OBJECTIVES

To update the Spanish Consensus on the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of ISSNHL.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

After a systematic review of the literature from 1966 to March 2018, on MESH terms «(acute or sudden) hearing loss or deafness», a third update was performed, including 1508 relevant papers.

RESULTS

Regarding diagnosis, 11ISSNHL is clinically suspected, the following diagnostic tests are mandatory: otoscopy, acumetry, tonal audiometry, speech audiometry, and tympanometry, to discount conductive causes. After clinical diagnosis has been established, and before treatment is started, a full analysis should be performed. An MRI should then be requested, ideally performed during the first 15 days after diagnosis, to discount specific causes and to help to understand the physiopathological mechanisms in each case. Although treatment is very controversial, due to its effect on quality of life after ISSNHL and the few rare adverse effects associated with short-term steroid treatment, this consensus recommends that all patients should be treated with steroids, orally and/or intratympanically, depending on each patient. In the event of failure of systemic steroids, intratympanic rescue is also recommended. Follow-up should be at day 7, and after 12 months.

CONCLUSION

By consensus, results after treatment should be reported as absolute decibels recovered in pure tonal audiometry and as improvement in speech audiometry.

Inpatient treatment of patients with idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss: a population-based healthcare research study

PURPOSE

The aim was to determine inpatient treatment rates of idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSNHL) with focus on diagnostics, treatment, and outcome.

METHODS

A retrospective population-based study in the federal state Thuringia in 2011 and 2012 was performed on all 490 inpatients (51% females, median age: 60 years) treated for ISSNHL (Median duration: 7 days). The association between analyzed parameters and the probability of recovery was tested using univariable and multivariable statistics.

RESULTS

The inpatient treatment rate for ISSNHL was 11.23 per 100,000. 172 patients (35%) had an outpatient treatment prior to inpatient treatment. For pure-tone audiometry of the three most affected frequencies (3PTAmax), the initial median hearing loss was 66.67 dB, the median absolute hearing gain ΔPTA_abs was 10.0 dB, and the median relative hearing gain in relation with the contralateral side ΔPTA_{rel contral} was 30.86%. 51% of the patients reached a ΔPTA_abs of ≥ 10 dB. About 2 of 5 patients recovered to a ΔPTA_{rel contral} ≥ 50% or reached ≤ 10 dB of contralateral ear. The multivariate analysis revealed that an ISSNHL on the left side [Hazard ratio (HR) = 1.6.88; confidence interval (CI) = 1.161-2.454], no down-sloping audiogram type (HR = 2.016; CI = 1.391-2.921), and no prior outpatient prednisolone treatment (HR = 2.374; CI = 1.505-3.745) were independent factors associated with better recovery (ΔPTA_abs ≥ 10 dB).

CONCLUSION

Inpatient treatment of ISSNHL is variable in daily practice. The population-based recovery rate was worse than reported in clinical trials. More standardization and clearer criteria for outpatient, inpatient, and salvage therapy are needed.