Intratympanic glucocorticosteroid therapy for idiopathic sudden hearing loss: Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Effects of Oral Steroids Combined with Postauricular Steroid Injection on Patients with Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss with Delaying Intervention: A Retrospective Analysis

Background

In the otology clinic, we often receive some sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL) patients accompanied by annoying tinnitus, who usually visited over three weeks after the onset. Nevertheless, due to the high treatment cost and relatively low cure rate, there are still great disputes about hospitalization or not for these patients. Aim: This study aimed to perform a retrospective analysis for analyzing the efficacy of treatment with oral steroids combined with postauricular steroid injection in patients with delaying effective treatment.

Material/Methods

A total of 157 eligible SSNHL patients with delaying effective treatment over three weeks were enrolled in this study. According to different treatment methods of oral steroids with or without postauricular steroid injection, these patients were divided into three groups: PO (prednisone oral) group, PSI (prednisone oral and postauricular steroid injection) group, and PII (prednisone oral and postauricular lidocaine injection) group. The changes in level of hearing, mean subjective tinnitus loudness, and side effects were analyzed in the three groups.

Results

Hearing improvement and tinnitus remission were all observed in three groups after treatment. Compared with PO and PII groups, those patients in PSI groups had more improvement in level of hearing and mean subjective tinnitus. The level of tinnitus loudness was statistically significantly correlated with the level of PTA both before treatment and after treatment.

Conclusion

Oral steroids combined with postauricular steroid injection should be employed for treatment of SSNHL patients with delaying effective treatment over three weeks.

Intra-Tympanic Dexamethasone Therapy via Grommet Insertion for Improved Auditory Outcome in Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss

Idiopathic sudden-sensorineural hearing loss (ISSHL) is an emergent otological condition needing prompt treatment for better recovery. In our study we aimed to determine the efficacy of intra-tympanic dexamethasone therapy after inserting a grommet in postero-inferior quadrant of the tympanic membrane for dexamethasone instillation. This is a prospective cohort study of 31 patients of ISSHL, in whom grommet was inserted and dexamethasone drops were instilled for 5 days. Several factors such as time of initiation of therapy, age of patient was considered, and inferences were drawn. Auditory outcomes were divided into low, mid and high frequency and the results were tabulated. Paired t tested was applied for all frequencies for both pre-test and post-test. P-value was (< 0.05) in all the three ranges of frequencies. Also, statistical significance was found between early treatment from onset of disease and auditory outcome. The earlier the therapy was initiated, better were the results.

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.

Intratympanic corticosteroid injection as a first-line treatment of the patients with idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss compared to systemic steroid: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The current study aimed to investigate if there is a difference in the use of intratympanic steroid therapy (IST), compared to systemic steroid treatment (SST), as an initial treatment for patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL) by a meta-analysis design performed on the mean pure-tone average (PTA) improvement and the complete recovery rate.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed on randomized controlled trials published from 1990 to August 2020 in some databases including PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane library/CENTRAL, Ovid, ProQuest, Google Scholar, and clinical trials.gov. The primary outcomes of interest were pure-tone average improvement and complete recovery rates.

RESULTS

Six eligible studies with 496 patients (250 patients in the IST group and 246 subjects in the SST group) were included in this study. The pooled standardized mean difference of the PTAs was estimated as 0.07 (95% CI = -0.10 to 0.25; I² = 0.0%, P = 0.668), and the pooled odds ratio of complete recovery rate was obtained as 1.00 (95% CI = 0.66 to 0.151; I² = 31.6, P = 0.199). Moreover, the pooled standardized mean difference of pure-tone average for the intratympanic steroid treatment group compared to the patients with oral steroid treatment was 0.07 (95% CI = -0.12 to 0.26; I² = 0.0%, P = 0.526).

CONCLUSIONS

The current study demonstrated that the effect of intratympanic injection of corticosteroid, as a first-line treatment, is not statistically different from the systemic route in improving the hearing outcomes among patients with SSNHL.

Intratympanic Steroid for the Management of Sudden Hearing Loss: Introduction of a Tapering Method

INTRODUCTION

Sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL) is a therapeutic challenge. There are several controversies regarding the management protocol of SSNHL. This study aimed to present the results of a novel treatment algorithm, which is a combination of systemic steroids and a tapering intratympanic (IT) dexamethasone regimen.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The past 10 years' medical records of idiopathic SSNHL cases in Ghaem and Emamreza hospital, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences were evaluated. Patients were assessed using standardized methods for pure-tone threshold audiometry. The management method of SSNHL treatment included oral steroids combined with IT administration of dexamethasone once a day for 7 days and continuing it on an alternate day and then weekly basis. Patients' recovery was assessed using Siegel's criteria.

RESULTS

This study included a total of 248 cases of idiopathic sudden hearing loss, with a mean age of 40.63±16.19 years. In total, 105 (42.3%) and 143 (57.7%) patients were female and male, respectively. The most common associated symptoms included tinnitus (86.9%, n=205) followed by vertigo (52.1%, n=122). The final hearing outcome of patients showed that 39 (15.7%), 38(15.3%), 86 (34.7%), and 85 (34.3%) patients underwent a complete recovery, partial recovery, slight recovery, and no recovery, based on Siegel's criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

The dose, interval, and duration of IT steroid treatment were not universally approved. The treatment method designed based on a tapering of IT steroid injection in combination with already known systemic administration of steroids can be a treatment option in SSNHL patients.

[Corticosteroids for acute sensorineural hearing loss treatment. The contemporary state of problem. Literature review. Part 1]

The article presents modern literary data relating to the expediency of the purpose of glucocorticosteroids in sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSHL) of various genes. In detail, the radar molecular mechanisms and the anatomo-physiological features of the exposure to the inner ear, side effects, the introduction methods, their comparative efficacy and modern schemes of the SSHL.

[Glucocorticosteroids in the treatment of acute neurosensory hearing loss. The current state of the problem. Part 2]

Modern literature data are presented on the choice of a drug for hormonal therapy in acute neurosensory hearing loss of various origins, the doses used for systemic therapy, the features and methods of intratympanic administration of glucocorticosteroids, and the evaluation of the effectiveness of treatment with this group of drugs.

Intratympanic vs systemic use of steroids as first-line treatment for sudden hearing loss: A meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL) is a common disease in otology, and steroids play an important role in its treatment. Steroids can be administered systemically or locally, and the efficacies of different administration routes remain controversial.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane, EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang and Weipu databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on glucocorticoid treatments for SSNHL to compare the efficacy of topical and systemic steroid administration. The Review Manager 5.4 software was used for synthesis of data: the rate of reported hearing improvement and change in pure-tone audiometry (PTA).

RESULTS

In all the included studies, when intratympanic administration was compared to systemic therapies, the risk difference (RD) using reported hearing improvement as an outcome measure was 0.08 (95% CI: 0.01-0.14, I2 = 45%). Using PTA changes as an outcome measure in 4 studies, the mean difference (MD) was 10.43 dB (95% CI: 3.68-17.18, I2 = 81%). Hearing improvement RD was also compared among different types of steroid, recovery criteria, follow-up times and diagnostic criteria, and showed no significant differences exception for recovery criteria (>10 dB) (RD -0.06, 95% CI: 0.14-0.2, I2 = 0%).

CONCLUSION

As the initial treatment for SSNHL, topical steroids seem to be superior to systemic steroid administration, especially in patients with contraindications to systemic steroids usage. However, further verification based on high-quality research is needed.

Glucocorticoids protect HEI-OC1 cells from tunicamycin-induced cell damage via inhibiting endoplasmic reticulum stress

Background

To analyze mechanisms of action of glucocorticoid treatment for endoplasmic reticulum stress (ERS) in sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL), we aimed to evaluate the expression and activation status of the protein kinase RNA-like ER kinase (PERK)–C/EBP homologous protein (CHOP) pathway, which is the major pathway in the ERS.

Methods

In the present study, we established an in vitro ERS model using tunicamycin-treated hair-cell-like HEI-OC1 cells. The effect of dexamethasone on proliferation inhibition, apoptosis, and ATF4–CHOP pathway in HEI-OC1 cells was examined by CCK-8 assay, flow cytometry, western blotting, and reverse transcription PCR, respectively.

Results

In HEI-OC1 cells, dexamethasone was shown to significantly reduce the tunicamycin-induced expression of ATF4 and CHOP in the context of sustained viability and proliferation, a therapeutic effect that was reversible by co-treatment with a glucocorticoid antagonist.

Conclusion

Dexamethasone can protect hair-cell-like HEI-OC1 cells from ERS damage, which may be one of the mechanisms of action for GCs in SNHL treatment.

Comparison of two different intratympanic corticosteroid injection protocols as salvage treatments for idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss

PURPOSE

We aimed to investigate the effect of interval length and total count of intratympanic steroid (ITS) injections in salvage treatment of patients with idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSNHL).

METHODS

This retrospective case-control study included 64 patients with ISSNHL, who were treated with ITS injections as salvage therapy at a tertiary referral centre. From September 2019 to December 2020, 32 patients received up to four injections every 2-4 days (revised-protocol group). These patients were 1:1 matched to patients, who received up to three injections at 1-week intervals between January 2014 and August 2019 (initial-protocol group). Hearing outcomes of the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

Both ITS salvage treatment protocols resulted in a statistically significant hearing improvement (p < 0.05). The initial-protocol declined hearing thresholds by 12 ± 11.7 dB (p < 0.001, d = 1, P = 99%). Mean hearing function was improved by 13.4 ± 19.1 dB in the revised-protocol group [p < 0.001, d = 0.7, P = 98%]. A clinically significant hearing improvement (> 10 dB) was seen in 18 patients (58.1%) in the initial-protocol group and in 14 patients (41.9%) in the revised-protocol group. A comparison of the hearing outcomes between protocol groups revealed no statistically significant differences (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

These results indicate that a shorter injection interval does not lead to better hearing outcomes in ITS salvage treatment for ISSNHL. Moreover, fewer ITS injections may reduce costs, physical/mental stress of the patients and lower the risk of persistent tympanic perforations.

Intratympanic vs Systemic Corticosteroids in First-line Treatment of Idiopathic Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Importance

To our knowledge, evidence-based recommendations on the intratympanic vs systemic administration of corticosteroids for the treatment of idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss remain unestablished, and contradictory conclusions have been reported in previous meta-analyses.

Objective

To compare recovery from idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss based on systemic, intratympanic, or a combined treatment with corticosteroids as first-line treatment.

Data Sources

We adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. We searched PubMed, Embase, OvidSP, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library from January 1, 1966, to July 1, 2018. This study was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42018109314).

Study Selection

We included randomized studies. Included studies must have excluded identifiable causes. Corticosteroids must have been administered solitarily. We excluded studies that did not define hearing loss as a minimum 30 dB within 72 hours.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

We identified 170 titles, of which 56 (32.9%) were eligible for full-text screening. We independently extracted data. We applied a fixed-effects model to investigate our objectives.

Main Outcomes and Measure

We aimed to (1) estimate the difference in mean pure tone average (PTA) gain in decibels from intratympanic treatment vs systemic treatment and (2) investigate odds ratios for recovery between the different treatment groups.

Results

We included 7 eligible studies. A total of 710 patients were allocated to receive either intratympanic treatment (IT group, 235 [33%]), systemic treatment (ST group; 325 [46%]) or combined intratympanic and systemic treatment (CB group; 150 [21%]). The PTA was measured by taking the mean of 4 frequencies: 4 studies measured at 500, 1000, 2000, and 3000 Hz and 3 studies measured at 500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz. The ST group had a 2.01-dB higher PTA gain (95% CI, -5.61 dB to 1.59 dB; P = .96; I2 = 0%) compared with the IT group and the odds for achieving complete recovery was not significantly different at an odds ratio of 0.94 (95% CI, 0.61 to 1.44; P = .19; I2 = 34.5%). For the CB group vs the ST group, the odds ratio was 1.11 (95% CI, 0.68 to 1.82; P = .75; I2 = 0%). The analysis of the CB group vs IT group comprised only 2 studies.

Conclusions and Relevance

This study does not suggest that corticosteroid delivered intratympanically is more beneficial than systemic treatment in the case of moderate to severe idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss. There were no indications that combined treatment was associated with improved hearing outcomes compared with either systemic or intratympanic treatment.

Idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss: Effectiveness of salvage treatment with low-dose intratympanic dexamethasone

Objectives

To evaluate hearing outcome of salvage treatment with intratympanic steroids (ITS) in idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSNHL) refractory to initial systemic steroid (SS) therapy.

Material and methods

A retrospective medical chart review was conducted on 54 consecutive patients with ISSNHL refractory to SS. Salvage treatment with a low dose intratympanic dexamethasone (4 mg/ml) was offered after one week of primary treatment. Patients were divided into two groups: 25 patients accepted ITS (treatment group) and 29 patients did not undergo additional treatment (control group). A pure tone average (PTA) gain of at least 10 dB was considered hearing improvement.

Results

Hearing improvement rate was higher in ITS group compared to control group (40% vs. 13.8%, p = 0.035). A mean PTA improvement of 8.6 ± 9.8 dB was observed in the ITS group and, whereas the control group had an average hearing gain of 0.7 ± 2 dB (p < 0.001). Audiometric analysis revealed a significant hearing gain in ITS group at all tested frequencies compared to control group (p < 0.05). Analysis of the selected variables, identified intratympanic steroid treatment as the only independent prognostic factor for hearing improvement (OR = 4.2, 95% CI: 1.1-15.7; p = 0.04).

Conclusion

Intratympanic low dose dexamethasone is effective in patients with incomplete hearing recovery after primary systemic steroid treatment.

Impacts of different methylprednisolone administration routes in patients with sudden hearing loss or Meniere's disease

BACKGROUND

Evidence suggests that glucocorticoids are important in the treatment of sudden hearing loss (SHL) and Meniere's disease (MD). However, different glucocorticoid administration methods may have a significant impact on treatment outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate effects of different glucocorticoid administration methods on sudden hearing loss and Meniere's disease.

METHODS

In this study, glucocorticoids were administered orally in 18 patients, by retroauricular injection in 15 patients and by intratympanic injection in 15 patients. White blood cell (WBC) count, serum K+, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), body temperature, heart rate and blood pressure were used to evaluate effects of glucocorticoids on patients with hearing loss. Visual analog scale (VAS) of pain and sleep disorders were also surveyed, and pure tone audiometry (PTA) results were compared among groups to evaluate efficacy of different glucocorticoids administration methods.

RESULT

WBC count, heart rate and blood pressure were higher in patients taking oral glucocorticoids, while body temperature, serum K+ and FPG levels did not change in all three groups. However, patients who received intratympanic injection of glucocorticoids experienced more pain, while those taking oral glucocorticoids reported more sleep impairment. Treatment efficacy on hearing loss was not significantly different among the three groups.

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that systemic glucocorticoid administration can result in greater whole body responses than local administration, but with similar hearing treatment efficacy.

Idiopathic Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Objective

Idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSNHL) is uncommon in children, and its treatment and outcome are debated. We aimed to critically review evidence in the literature about treatment options and functional outcomes of pediatric ISSNHL. Additionally, we performed a meta-analysis of the results of combined systemic-intratympanic steroid therapy versus solely systemic treatment.

Data Sources

A search was run in the PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases.

Review Methods

Included articles were original ISSNHL case series, written in English, with a population age ranging from 2 to 19 years. Other study types (single case reports, editorials, and reviews) and case series with known etiology of sudden hearing loss were excluded. Descriptive data of patients, treatments, outcomes, and possible prognostic factors were extracted and recorded for every included study.

Results

Twelve articles (7 cohort and 5 case-control studies) met all the selection criteria. Based on only the studies that provided sufficient data about clinical outcome, the pooled overall recovery rate was 67.91% (95% CI, 58.34%-77.48%). No studies showed a significant difference between systemic steroid and combined systemic-intratympanic steroid. The pooled odds ratio for combined systemic-intratympanic steroid versus systemic steroid alone was 0.90 (95% CI, 0.36-2.27) based on a random effects model, ruling out any significant difference between these treatment options.

Conclusions

The results of our meta-analysis did not support combination therapy more than systemic steroid alone. Further prospective clinical trials are necessary to establish evidence-based therapies.

Sudden sensorineural hearing loss: What factors influence the response to therapy?

The standard treatment of Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss is based on oral steroids. In addition, intratympanic steroid is currently used in patients who fail to respond to oral treatment. The aim of the present study was to evaluate, in patients affected by SSHL, factors that influence the response to systemic and intratympanic steroid treatment. A retrospective analysis was conducted on 149 patients, all treated with systemic steroids. Moreover, patients not responsive to systemic therapy were treated with intratympanic steroids as salvage therapy. Auditory gain was assessed through the recovery rate at the discharge and after 30 days. Statistical analysis demonstrated that patients with delayed treatment and down-sloping auditory curve presented a poor recovery. Linear and stepwise regression showed that hypertriglyceridemia and hyperglycemia were negative prognostic factors. The prognosis of SSHL is affected by hyperglycemia and hypertriglyceridemia suggesting that a microvascular dysfunction within the cochlea could impair hearing recovery. Intratympanic steroid treatment was used as salvage treatment, however in patients with poor prognostic factors or at risk for side effects, it could be used in association with systemic treatment.

The use of combined pharmacotherapy and hyperbaric oxygen in the treatment of sudden sensorineural hearing loss

Aim: Sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL) involves acute unexplained hearing loss, nearly always one-sided of 30dB or greater over at least three contiguous audiometric frequencies. The aetiology of SSNHL is mostly unknown. According to the literature, the causes include vascular, microbial and autoimmune problems. There is still no agreed standard treatment. The aim of the paper was to evaluate the results of combined pharmacotherapy and hyperbaric oxygen therapy in patients with idiopathic sudden deafness. Material/Methods: The study was carried out on 40 patients with SSNHL. The patients were divided into two groups: group I – 24 patients treated with the combined pharmacotherapy and hyperbaric oxygen therapy and group II – 16 patients treated only pharmacologically. The patients from Group 1 were treated in the Centre of Hyperbaric Therapy CREATOR Ltd. in Lodz, Poland. Each patient underwent 15 sessions in a hyperbaric chamber. In all patients, the percentage of hearing loss for the selected frequencies was assessed before and after the therapy according to Sabine and Fowler. Results: The group of 40 patie nts aged from 33 to 77 years (mean 52.4) included 21 females and 19 males. Group I consisted of 24 patients, 11 females and 13 males, group II consisted of 16 patients, 10 females, and 6 males. After therapy, the mean hearing level in all patients improved by 27.14%, in Group I – by 34.34%, in Group II – by 16.3%. Conclusions: Early hyperbaric oxygen therapy combined with steroid therapy improves prognosis and shows good results in sudden hearing loss treatment.

Sudden sensorineural hearing loss - A contemporary review of management issues

Sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL) is an enigmatic entity, with obscure pathophysiology and debatable efficacy of the treatment agents used. An underlying cause is identified in only 10-15% of cases. The management of the remaining patients, classified as 'idiopathic', is empirical, and is conventionally with systemic steroids, vasodilator therapy, rheological agents, and antioxidants, to list a few amongst the host of the agents employed for the treatment. The availability of conflicting outcomes and lack of conclusive evidence has resulted in the propagation of consensus-based treatment protocols. In the present review, we discuss the various controversial issues and newer developments in the management of idiopathic SSNHL. The current review aims to present a narrative outlook of the updated evidence base available from PUBMED, augmented with relevant designated publications.

[New progress of IGF-1 and allosteroid injection in the treatment of sudden deafness complicated with type 2 diabetes]

Glucocorticoids are a recognized treatment for sudden deafness, and there has always been a contradiction between the control of blood glucose levels and the use of glucocorticoids. The systemic use of hormones may lead to a series of adverse events, which are dose-dependent. High doses can induce an increase in blood sugar, especially for patients with type 2 diabetes, which can aggravate their condition or cause complications. The systemic application of glucocorticoids has been largely replaced by local glucocorticoids treatment. Topical insulin-like growth factor （IGF-1） is used without increasing blood sugar, thus avoiding the possible complications. The author intends to compare the local IGF-1 treatment and local glucocorticoid treatment to systemic therapy. The efficacy of local IGF-1 therapy in treating corticosteroid-refractory sudden sensorineural hearing loss combined with type 2 diabetes is reviewed.

Intratympanic application of triamcinolone in sudden hearing loss-radiologic anatomy in cone beam CT and its' correlation to clinical outcome

PURPOSE

To evaluate temporal bone cone-beam CT in patients with idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSNHL) being treated with primary and secondary intratympanic (IT) triamcinolone and to possibly correlate these results to the clinical outcome.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of patients treated with IT triamcinolone for ISSNHL at our department in 2018. Pre- and post-therapeutic audiologic examinations included four-tone average (FTA) at 0.5, 1, 2 and 3 kHz. Using a clinical questionnaire, pre-therapeutic CBCT scans were re-evaluated looking at items, which might interfere with adequate drug diffusion into the inner ear (e.g. bony overhangs or secondary membranes at the round or oval window).

RESULTS

Thirty-one patients were included. Twenty-four (77%; group A) had experienced ineffective systemic steroid therapy before and seven (23%; group B) received primary IT injections. Four group A-patients (21%) and two group B-patients (33%) showed a post-therapeutic FTA improvement of more than 15 dB HL. Bony overhangs at the round window niche (RWN) were present in seven cases (26%), a secondary membrane at the RWN in four (15%) and soft tissue in eight (30%) cases, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Most patients present radiological findings in CBCT imaging, which might interfere with drug diffusion through the RW membrane. Interestingly, soft or bony tissue obstructing the RWN or the OWN was found in 50% of patients, who showed improvement of hearing. We conclude that radiologic 'tiny' findings are either clinically irrelevant or improvement in hearing is independent from intratympanic drug delivery.

Vestibular evoked myogenic potentials in the prognosis of sudden hearing loss ‒ a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Sudden hearing loss is an otorhinolaryngological emergency that often leads to severe damage to the auditory and vestibular function. The vestibular evoked myogenic potential is a test that allows a noninvasive evaluation of the otolithic system function and vestibulospinal and vestibulo-ocular pathways.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the importance of vestibular evoked myogenic potential in determining the prognosis of patients with sudden hearing loss.

METHODS

A search for articles published up to December 2018 was performed in the PubMed, Cochrane, VHL and LILACS databases using MeSH descriptors. Retrospective and prospective articles were included containing cervical or ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potential in sudden hearing loss patients and information on associated vertigo and/or dizziness.

RESULTS

Sixteen of 62 initially selected articles met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Regarding the methodology of the evaluated studies, 8 studies were prospective, six were retrospective, one contained part of the data from a retrospective analysis and another part from a prospective analysis, and one study was cross-sectional. A total of 872 patients were evaluated (50.22% males and 49.77% females) with a mean age of 51.26 years. Four hundred and twenty-six patients (50.35%) had vertigo and/or dizziness associated with sudden hearing loss. The cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potential was performed in all studies, but only seven assessed the ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potential. The cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potential showed alterations in 38.65% of 846 evaluated ears, whereas ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potential showed alterations in 47.88% of 368 evaluated ears. The hearing recovery rate was analyzed by 8 articles, with 63.4% of 410 evaluated ears showing hearing recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

The studies suggest that the assessment of the vestibular system using vestibular evoked myogenic potential seems to be important in the prognosis of sudden hearing loss. For better follow-up of patients with sudden hearing loss, the emphasis should not be limited to the cochlea, but also include the diagnosis and treatment of vestibular abnormalities, regardless of the presence of vertigo.

Comparison of 2 Different Intratympanic Methylprednisolone Injection Schedules in Combination With Intravenous Dexamethasone for Unilateral Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss

Sudden sensorineural hearing loss is a common otologic disease in clinic. Systemic and intratympanic steroid treatment have been proved to be effective, but the regimens vary from center to center. The purpose of the study is to analyze the effects of the combined application of intravenous dexamethasone and intratympanic methylprednisolone injection in different time strategies for the treatment of unilateral sudden sensorineural hearing loss. A retrospective chart review was performed for the period from March 2016 to June 2018 at our Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery. A total number of 61 patients who met the academy criteria for unilateral sudden hearing loss were included and grouped based on the time to introduce intratympanic methylprednisolone. All the patients received intravenous dexamethasone 10 mg once daily for 5 days, followed 5 mg once daily for the next 7 days. Intratympanic methylprednisolone (40 mg) was injected every other day 4 times into all patients. This regimen was commenced on day 1 in group 1 and on day 6 in group 2. The pre and posttreatment pure-tone audiograms were analyzed. Sixty-one patients met our inclusion criteria. No significant differences were observed between patients' demographics or pretreatment hearing thresholds. In the 3 months posttreatment pure-tone audiogram assessment, the mean hearing threshold improvement were similar between groups with no frequency specificity. The curative rate in both groups were similar and satisfying. Two patients with diabetes mellitus had persistent small perforations. Some patients had other transient discomfort that disappeared before discharge. The different timing of initiation of intratympanic methylprednisolone injection does not significantly affect the outcome of the treatment for sudden sensorineural hearing loss. Thus, we suggest that intratympanic steroid injection should not be applied as a first-line method except for patients who do not respond early to systemic steroid therapy.

Healthy lifestyle consultation based on traditional Chinese medicine versus routine patient education in the treatment of idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss after failure of systemic therapy: study protocol for a clinical randomised trial

Background

Idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSNHL) is a major cause of deafness. Despite the advances in systemic therapy, some cases of ISSNHL are untreated, because the exact ISSNHL aetiology is unclear. Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) has been used to treat diseases for thousands of years and is popular and widely practiced in Asia. TCM includes guidance on a healthy lifestyle. In recent decades, the relationship between lifestyle and disease has been emphasised; an unhealthy lifestyle may lead to illnesses. Thus, this study aims to compare the efficacy of lifestyle modification based on TCM with the usual consultation of ISSNHL after failure of a 2-week systemic therapy to provide a scientific basis for clinical decisions.

Methods

This study is a clinical randomised trial that involves 56 patients diagnosed with ISSNHL but who have had incomplete recovery after initial management (at least 2 weeks of routine Western medical treatment). The study is performed in accordance with the sudden hearing loss clinical guideline of the American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, published in 2012. Participants are randomly distributed into two groups: the healthy lifestyle modification group based on TCM and the control group (1:1 ratio). Patient follow-up lasts for 3 months. The primary outcome measure is the effective rate of hearing improvement, which is defined as the proportion of patients with at least 15 dB of improvement in the average thresholds of hearing loss frequency. The secondary outcome measures are improvements in word recognition score, Tinnitus Handicap Inventory and visual analogue scale for ear blockage and dizziness. Assessments are made at baseline and after lifestyle modification for 1 and 3 months.

Discussion

The efficacy of healthy lifestyle modification based on a TCM programme for patients with ISSNHL with incomplete recovery after failure of initial systemic therapy is determined in this trial. Positive results will provide clinical evidence on the effects of a TCM-based healthy lifestyle, which could be recommended as salvage therapy for patients with ISSNHL.

Trial registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR-INR-17011459. Registered on 22 May 2017.

A systematic review and network meta-analysis of existing pharmacologic therapies in patients with idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss

BACKGROUND

Hearing loss is one of the leading causes of disability worldwide. Patients with hearing loss experience impaired quality of life, as well as emotional and financial consequences that affect both themselves and their families. Idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSNHL) is a common but difficult to treat condition that has a sudden onset of ≤ 72 hour associated with various etiologies, with the majority of cases being idiopathic. There exists a wide range of therapeutic options, however, the uncertainty surrounding their comparative efficacy and safety makes selection of treatment difficult. This systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) assessed the relative effects of competing treatments for management of ISSNHL.

METHODS

A protocol for this review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42017073756). A detailed search of MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library from inception to February 8th, 2018 was carried out by an experienced information specialist. Grey literature was also searched. Screening full-text records, and risk of bias assessment were carried out independently by two reviewers, and disagreements were resolved through consensus or third party adjudication, while data was collected by one reviewer and verified by a second reviewer. Bayesian network meta-analyses (NMA) were performed to inform comparisons between interventions for a priori specified outcomes that included pure tone average (PTA) improvement and hearing recovery.

RESULTS

The search identified a total of 1,138 citations, of which 613 remained for review after removal of duplicates. Of these, 23 publications describing 19 unique studies (total sample size of 1,527) met our a priori eligibility criteria, that were assessed to be at unclear or high risk of bias on several domains. We identified data on several interventions for ISSNHL therapy and were able to construct treatment networks consisting of six intervention groups that included placebo; intratympanic (IT) steroid; IT plus systemic steroid; per oral (PO) steroid; intravenous (IV) steroid; and IV plus PO steroid for our NMAs. IT plus systemic steroids demonstrated the largest difference in PTA improvement compared to placebo (25.85 dB, 95% CrI 7.18-40.58), followed by IV plus PO steroids (22.06 dB, 95% CrI 1.24-39.17), IT steroids (18.24 dB, 95% CrI 3.00-29.81). We observed that the difference of PTA improvement between each intervention and placebo diminished over time, attributed to spontaneous recovery. The binary outcomes of hearing recovery demonstrated similar relative ordering of interventions but were less sensitive than PTA improvement to capture the significant differences between interventions and placebo.

CONCLUSION

Unclear to high risk of bias trials rated IT plus systemic steroid treatment as the best among the six interventions compared, and all active treatments were better than placebo in improving PTA. However, it should be noted that certain comparisons were based on indirect evidence only or few studies of small sample size, and analyses were unable to control for steroid type and dosage. Given these limitations, further data originating from methodologically sound and rigorous trials with adequate reporting are needed to confirm our findings.

Traditional oriental medicine for sensorineural hearing loss: Can ethnopharmacology contribute to potential drug discovery?

ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE

In Traditional Oriental Medicine (TOM), the development of hearing pathologies is related to an inadequate nourishment of the ears by the kidney and other organs involved in regulation of bodily fluids and nutrients. Several herbal species have historically been prescribed for promoting the production of bodily fluids or as antiaging agents to treat deficiencies in hearing.

AIM OF REVIEW

The prevalence of hearing loss has been increasing in the last decade and is projected to grow considerably in the coming years. Recently, several herbal-derived products prescribed in TOM have demonstrated a therapeutic potential for acquired sensorineural hearing loss and tinnitus. Therefore, the aims of this review are to provide a comprehensive overview of the current known efficacy of the herbs used in TOM for preventing different forms of acquired sensorineural hearing loss and tinnitus, and associate the traditional principle with the demonstrated pharmacological mechanisms to establish a solid foundation for directing future research.

METHODS

The present review collected the literature related to herbs used in TOM or related compounds on hearing from Chinese, Korean, and Japanese herbal classics; library catalogs; and scientific databases (PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar; and Science Direct).

RESULTS

This review shows that approximately 25 herbal species and 40 active compounds prescribed in TOM for hearing loss and tinnitus have shown in vitro or in vivo beneficial effects for acquired sensorineural hearing loss produced by noise, aging, ototoxic drugs or diabetes. The inner ear is highly vulnerable to ischemia and oxidative damage, where several TOM agents have revealed a direct effect on the auditory system by normalizing the blood supply to the cochlea and increasing the antioxidant defense in sensory hair cells. These strategies have shown a positive impact on maintaining the inner ear potential, sustaining the production of endolymph, reducing the accumulation of toxic and inflammatory substances, preventing sensory cell death and preserving sensory transmission. There are still several herbal species with demonstrated therapeutic efficacy whose mechanisms have not been deeply studied and others that have been traditionally used in hearing loss but have not been tested experimentally. In clinical studies, Ginkgo biloba, Panax ginseng, and Astragalus propinquus have demonstrated to improve hearing thresholds in patients with sensorineural hearing loss and alleviated the symptoms of tinnitus. However, some of these clinical studies have been limited by small sample sizes, lack of an adequate control group or contradictory results.

CONCLUSIONS

Current therapeutic strategies have proven that the goal of the traditional oriental medicine principle of increasing bodily fluids is a relevant approach for reducing the development of hearing loss by improving microcirculation in the blood-labyrinth barrier and increasing cochlear blood flow. The potential benefits of TOM agents expand to a multi-target approach on different auditory structures of the inner ear related to increased cochlear blood flow, antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, anti-apoptotic and neuroprotective activities. However, more research is required, given the evidence is very limited in terms of the mechanism of action at the preclinical in vivo level and the scarce number of clinical studies published.

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.