Clinical Practice Guideline: Sudden Hearing Loss (Update)

OBJECTIVE

Sudden hearing loss is a frightening symptom that often prompts an urgent or emergent visit to a health care provider. It is frequently but not universally accompanied by tinnitus and/or vertigo. Sudden sensorineural hearing loss affects 5 to 27 per 100,000 people annually, with about 66,000 new cases per year in the United States. This guideline update provides evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis, management, and follow-up of patients who present with sudden hearing loss. It focuses on sudden sensorineural hearing loss in adult patients aged ≥18 years and primarily on those with idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss. Prompt recognition and management of sudden sensorineural hearing loss may improve hearing recovery and patient quality of life. The guideline update is intended for all clinicians who diagnose or manage adult patients who present with sudden hearing loss.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this guideline update is to provide clinicians with evidence-based recommendations in evaluating patients with sudden hearing loss and sudden sensorineural hearing loss, with particular emphasis on managing idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss. The guideline update group recognized that patients enter the health care system with sudden hearing loss as a nonspecific primary complaint. Therefore, the initial recommendations of this guideline update address distinguishing sensorineural hearing loss from conductive hearing loss at the time of presentation with hearing loss. They also clarify the need to identify rare, nonidiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss to help separate those patients from those with idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss, who are the target population for the therapeutic interventions that make up the bulk of the guideline update. By focusing on opportunities for quality improvement, this guideline should improve diagnostic accuracy, facilitate prompt intervention, decrease variations in management, reduce unnecessary tests and imaging procedures, and improve hearing and rehabilitative outcomes for affected patients.

METHODS

Consistent with the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation's "Clinical Practice Guideline Development Manual, Third Edition" (Rosenfeld et al. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2013;148[1]:S1-S55), the guideline update group was convened with representation from the disciplines of otolaryngology-head and neck surgery, otology, neurotology, family medicine, audiology, emergency medicine, neurology, radiology, advanced practice nursing, and consumer advocacy. A systematic review of the literature was performed, and the prior clinical practice guideline on sudden hearing loss was reviewed in detail. Key Action Statements (KASs) were updated with new literature, and evidence profiles were brought up to the current standard. Research needs identified in the original clinical practice guideline and data addressing them were reviewed. Current research needs were identified and delineated.

RESULTS

The guideline update group made strong recommendations for the following: (KAS 1) Clinicians should distinguish sensorineural hearing loss from conductive hearing loss when a patient first presents with sudden hearing loss. (KAS 7) Clinicians should educate patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss about the natural history of the condition, the benefits and risks of medical interventions, and the limitations of existing evidence regarding efficacy. (KAS 13) Clinicians should counsel patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss who have residual hearing loss and/or tinnitus about the possible benefits of audiologic rehabilitation and other supportive measures. These strong recommendations were modified from the initial clinical practice guideline for clarity and timing of intervention. The guideline update group made strong recommendations against the following: (KAS 3) Clinicians should not order routine computed tomography of the head in the initial evaluation of a patient with presumptive sudden sensorineural hearing loss. (KAS 5) Clinicians should not obtain routine laboratory tests in patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss. (KAS 11) Clinicians should not routinely prescribe antivirals, thrombolytics, vasodilators, or vasoactive substances to patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss. The guideline update group made recommendations for the following: (KAS 2) Clinicians should assess patients with presumptive sudden sensorineural hearing loss through history and physical examination for bilateral sudden hearing loss, recurrent episodes of sudden hearing loss, and/or focal neurologic findings. (KAS 4) In patients with sudden hearing loss, clinicians should obtain, or refer to a clinician who can obtain, audiometry as soon as possible (within 14 days of symptom onset) to confirm the diagnosis of sudden sensorineural hearing loss. (KAS 6) Clinicians should evaluate patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss for retrocochlear pathology by obtaining magnetic resonance imaging or auditory brainstem response. (KAS 10) Clinicians should offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, intratympanic steroid therapy when patients have incomplete recovery from sudden sensorineural hearing loss 2 to 6 weeks after onset of symptoms. (KAS 12) Clinicians should obtain follow-up audiometric evaluation for patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss at the conclusion of treatment and within 6 months of completion of treatment. These recommendations were clarified in terms of timing of intervention and audiometry and method of retrocochlear workup. The guideline update group offered the following KASs as options: (KAS 8) Clinicians may offer corticosteroids as initial therapy to patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss within 2 weeks of symptom onset. (KAS 9a) Clinicians may offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, hyperbaric oxygen therapy combined with steroid therapy within 2 weeks of onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss. (KAS 9b) Clinicians may offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, hyperbaric oxygen therapy combined with steroid therapy as salvage therapy within 1 month of onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss.

DIFFERENCES FROM PRIOR GUIDELINE

Incorporation of new evidence profiles to include quality improvement opportunities, confidence in the evidence, and differences of opinion Included 10 clinical practice guidelines, 29 new systematic reviews, and 36 new randomized controlled trials Highlights the urgency of evaluation and initiation of treatment, if treatment is offered, by emphasizing the time from symptom occurrence Clarification of terminology by changing potentially unclear statements; use of the term sudden sensorineural hearing loss to mean idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss to emphasize that >90% of sudden sensorineural hearing loss is idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss and to avoid confusion in nomenclature for the reader Changes to the KASs from the original guideline: KAS 1-When a patient first presents with sudden hearing loss, conductive hearing loss should be distinguished from sensorineural. KAS 2-The utility of history and physical examination when assessing for modifying factors is emphasized. KAS 3-The word "routine" is added to clarify that this statement addresses nontargeted head computerized tomography scan that is often ordered in the emergency room setting for patients presenting with sudden hearing loss. It does not refer to targeted scans, such as temporal bone computerized tomography scan, to assess for temporal bone pathology. KAS 4-The importance of audiometric confirmation of hearing status as soon as possible and within 14 days of symptom onset is emphasized. KAS 5-New studies were added to confirm the lack of benefit of nontargeted laboratory testing in sudden sensorineural hearing loss. KAS 6-Audiometric follow-up is excluded as a reasonable workup for retrocochlear pathology. Magnetic resonance imaging, computerized tomography scan if magnetic resonance imaging cannot be done, and, secondarily, auditory brainstem response evaluation are the modalities recommended. A time frame for such testing is not specified, nor is it specified which clinician should be ordering this workup; however, it is implied that it would be the general or subspecialty otolaryngologist. KAS 7-The importance of shared decision making is highlighted, and salient points are emphasized. KAS 8-The option for corticosteroid intervention within 2 weeks of symptom onset is emphasized. KAS 9-Changed to KAS 9A and 9B. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy remains an option but only when combined with steroid therapy for either initial treatment (9A) or salvage therapy (9B). The timing of initial therapy is within 2 weeks of onset, and that of salvage therapy is within 1 month of onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss. KAS 10-Intratympanic steroid therapy for salvage is recommended within 2 to 6 weeks following onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss. The time to treatment is defined and emphasized. KAS 11-Antioxidants were removed from the list of interventions that the clinical practice guideline recommends against using. KAS 12-Follow-up audiometry at conclusion of treatment and also within 6 months posttreatment is added. KAS 13-This statement on audiologic rehabilitation includes patients who have residual hearing loss and/or tinnitus who may benefit from treatment. Addition of an algorithm outlining KASs Enhanced emphasis on patient education and shared decision making with tools provided to assist in same.

Clinical Practice Guideline

Objective. Sudden hearing loss (SHL) is a frightening symptom that often prompts an urgent or emergent visit to a physician. This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis, management, and follow-up of patients who present with SHL. The guideline primarily focuses on sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL) in adult patients (aged 18 and older). Prompt recognition and management of SSNHL may improve hearing recovery and patient quality of life (QOL). Sudden sensorineural hearing loss affects 5 to 20 per 100,000 population, with about 4000 new cases per year in the United States. This guideline is intended for all clinicians who diagnose or manage adult patients who present with SHL.

Purpose. The purpose of this guideline is to provide clinicians with evidence-based recommendations in evaluating patients with SHL, with particular emphasis on managing SSNHL. The panel recognized that patients enter the health care system with SHL as a nonspecific, primary complaint. Therefore, the initial recommendations of the guideline deal with efficiently distinguishing SSNHL from other causes of SHL at the time of presentation. By focusing on opportunities for quality improvement, the guideline should improve diagnostic accuracy, facilitate prompt intervention, decrease variations in management, reduce unnecessary tests and imaging procedures, and improve hearing and rehabilitative outcomes for affected patients.

Results. The panel made strong recommendations that clinicians should (1) distinguish sensorineural hearing loss from conductive hearing loss in a patient presenting with SHL; (2) educate patients with idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSNHL) about the natural history of the condition, the benefits and risks of medical interventions, and the limitations of existing evidence regarding efficacy; and (3) counsel patients with incomplete recovery of hearing about the possible benefits of amplification and hearing-assistive technology and other supportive measures. The panel made recommendations that clinicians should (1) assess patients with presumptive SSNHL for bilateral SHL, recurrent episodes of SHL, or focal neurologic findings; (2) diagnose presumptive ISSNHL if audiometry confirms a 30-dB hearing loss at 3 consecutive frequencies and an underlying condition cannot be identified by history and physical examination; (3) evaluate patients with ISSNHL for retrocochlear pathology by obtaining magnetic resonance imaging, auditory brainstem response, or audiometric follow-up; (4) offer intratympanic steroid perfusion when patients have incomplete recovery from ISSNHL after failure of initial management; and (5) obtain follow-up audiometric evaluation within 6 months of diagnosis for patients with ISSNHL. The panel offered as options that clinicians may offer (1) corticosteroids as initial therapy to patients with ISSNHL and (2) hyperbaric oxygen therapy within 3 months of diagnosis of ISSNHL. The panel made a recommendation against clinicians routinely prescribing antivirals, thrombolytics, vasodilators, vasoactive substances, or antioxidants to patients with ISSNHL. The panel made strong recommendations against clinicians (1) ordering computerized tomography of the head/brain in the initial evaluation of a patient with presumptive SSNHL and (2) obtaining routine laboratory tests in patients with ISSNHL.

Normal audiologic presentations in patients with acoustic neuroma: An evaluation using strict audiologic parameters

Although several studies have previously reported on patients presenting with "normal" audiologic parameters in acoustic neuroma, the present study is, to our knowledge, the first to exclusively examine in detail cases involving exceptionally stringent objective audiometric features. Of 369 patients with acoustic neuroma who were operated on between April 1980 and April 1997 by our group, 10 had strictly normal hearing, defined as follows: (1) pure-tone average < 20 dB; (2) speech discrimination score > 90%; and (3) interaural differences </= 10 dB at every hertz level. A high level of audiologic functioning was found to significantly lower the sensitivity of auditory brainstem response in the detection of acoustic neuroma. Magnetic resonance imaging was the only preoperative test exhibiting 100% sensitivity in this setting. Thus, a high level of clinical suspicion appears warranted in any case involving unexplained unilateral audiovestibular symptoms-including those instances in which strictly normal hearing parameters exist and are associated with negative auditory brainstem response findings.

Acoustic neuroma: correlations between morphology and otoneurological manifestations

Forty-two patients with acoustic neuroma (AN) were studied to determine whether different types of neuroma could be correlated with specific signs and symptoms of the disease. Based on gadolinium-enhanced TI-weighted MRI sequences, the 42 cases of AN could be divided into three groups, either by size (small: 11.9%, medium: 50%, and large: 38.1%) or by site of origin of the tumour (lateral: 16.7%, intermediate: 69%, and medial: 14.3%). Relations were found between the size and the site of origin of the neuromas and certain clinical, audiological and vestibular findings. The clinical presentation seemed to vary with the site of origin and the size of the tumour: patients with lateral neuromas generally had small tumours, sometimes only located in the internal auditory canal (IAC), and presented early subjective hearing loss while patients with medial neuromas had larger tumours which grew without causing significant audiological symptoms. Normal hearing function was seen only in the patients with medial ANs; however, a significant relation between the size or the site of origin of the AN and the average hearing threshold was not demonstrated. The sensitivity of the stapedial reflex test (SR) was higher for lateral ANs. Anomalies in the brainstem auditory evoked potentials (BAEPs) did not seem to be related to either the size or the site of origin of the AN. The vestibular tests demonstrated a higher frequency of central vestibular involvement in the large tumours, while normal function was more frequent in the lateral tumours. In the group studied the combination of BAEPs and vestibular tests allowed us to identify all the ANs with an optimal level of sensitivity.

Evaluating hearing threshold differences between ears as a screen for acoustic neuroma

Differences in pure tone thresholds between ears were evaluated at two different patient care facilities to determine this measure's value as a screen for acoustic neuroma. We evaluated the audiograms of tumor and nontumor groups to estimate the true positive rates and false positive rates for several decision rules. Threshold differences were found to be a more effective diagnostic tool for females than for males. However, even for the most effective rules, the efficiency of this test alone is mediocre, which indicates that hearing threshold differences between ears must be combined with other criteria for a cost-effective approach to acoustic neuroma identification. Furthermore, tumor size was not predicted by the amount of threshold asymmetry between ears, which suggests that some large, potentially life-threatening tumors may be missed if pure tone threshold differences are the sole criterion for referral for additional tests.

Brainstem auditory evoked potentials and blink reflexes in patients with pontocerebellar angle tumors

Brainstem auditory evoked potentials (BAEP) and blink reflexes (BR) were obtained from 13 patients with pontocerebellar angle (PCA) tumors whose pathological diagnosis was as follows: 7 acoustic neurinoma, 3 meningioma, 1 neurinoma, 1 brain stem epidermoid tumor, 1 arteriovenous malformation. The most prominent abnormality was noted in BAEP generated by stimulating the ear ipsilateral to the lesion and ipsilateral R1 reflexes obtained from ipsilateral stimulation of the supraorbital nerve.

Acoustic neuromas with normal hearing

We report on 10 patients with surgically proven acoustic neuroma (AN) who have normal hearing, and their clinical features have been investigated. The results obtained in this study were as follows: The clinical features of AN patients with normal hearing involved 1) predominance in younger adults, 2) predominance in small tumors with short duration after onset, 3) subjective hearing loss accompanied with tinnitus was the most common symptom, and 4) vertigo or dizziness without any cochlear symptoms was also a frequently seen symptom. We conclude that in order not to overlook AN among patients with normal hearing, transorbital X-ray and ABR tests should be performed on these patients for the screening purpose.

Electrically elicited blink reflex and early acoustic evoked potentials in circumscribed and diffuse brain stem lesions

In the present paper, the function of the brain stem in patients with brain stem lesions of various aetiology is investigated with electrophysiological methods. The clinical observations are supplemented by experimental investigations on cats, in which the blink reflex and the early acoustic evoked potentials were registered during the acute elevation of intracranial pressure. The findings in patients with circumscribed space-occupying lesions in the posterior fossa document that the registration of the BR and the BAEP have a functional diagnostic significance above and beyond the neurological and radiological investigation. In the case of the cerebellar space occupations, specific alterations could not be observed. On the contrary, the alterations of BR and BAEP indicate a general disturbance of brain stem function, possibly as a result of a general increase of intracranial pressure. In cerebellopontine angle tumours, both BR and BAEP showed specific alterations which were usually asymmetrical. The BR changes ipsilateral to the tumour are of major topodiagnostic significance, whereas the alterations of the contralateral potential are especially informative in the registration of BAEP. The alterations of BR and BAEP also allow an appraisal of the localization and extent of the lesion in primary space occupations in the brain stem: A pathological R1 indicates a pontine lesion, whereas pathological R2 responses are found in medullary and in oral pontine and mesencephalic lesions. In contrast to cerebellopontine angle tumours, the BAEP tends to show symmetrical alterations in primary brain stem lesions. The prolongations of interpeak latencies correspond to the brain stem segment concerned, and the same also applies to pathological amplitude reduction and deformations of individual potentials. In patients with localized brain stem damage, the reflex pathway of R2 is discussed on the basis of the BR findings. In contrast to the view held up to now that only structures situated caudal of the facial nucleus area are responsible for the genesis of the R2 response, it is assumed on the basis of our own observations that pontomesencephalic structures rostral to the facial nuclei are also important for the genesis of R2. Registration of BR and BAEP in patients with acute diffuse brain stem damage shows that both methods have a high diagnostic and prognostic value. Isolated damage and combined brain stem lesion can be demonstrated and the course can be followed up. Normalization of pathological findings reflects clinical recovery, and conversely a secondary deterioration indicates the presence of complications.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)