-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2021Neonatal sepsis is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. It is the third leading cause of neonatal mortality globally constituting 13% of overall neonatal mortality....
BACKGROUND
Neonatal sepsis is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. It is the third leading cause of neonatal mortality globally constituting 13% of overall neonatal mortality. Despite the high burden of neonatal sepsis, high-quality evidence in diagnosis and treatment is scarce. Possibly due to the diagnostic challenges of sepsis and the relative immunosuppression of the newborn, many neonates receive antibiotics for suspected sepsis. Antibiotics have become the most used therapeutics in neonatal intensive care units. The last Cochrane Review was updated in 2004. Given the clinical importance, an updated systematic review assessing the effects of different antibiotic regimens for early-onset neonatal sepsis is needed.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of different antibiotic regimens for early-onset neonatal sepsis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following electronic databases: CENTRAL (2020, Issue 8); Ovid MEDLINE; Embase Ovid; CINAHL; LILACS; Science Citation Index EXPANDED and Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science on 12 March 2021. We searched clinical trials databases and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included RCTs comparing different antibiotic regimens for early-onset neonatal sepsis. We included participants from birth to 72 hours of life at randomisation.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence. Our primary outcome was all-cause mortality, and our secondary outcomes were: serious adverse events, respiratory support, circulatory support, nephrotoxicity, neurological developmental impairment, necrotising enterocolitis, and ototoxicity. Our primary time point of interest was at maximum follow-up.
MAIN RESULTS
We included five RCTs (865 participants). All trials were at high risk of bias. The certainty of the evidence according to GRADE was very low. The included trials assessed five different comparisons of antibiotics. We did not conduct any meta-analyses due to lack of relevant data. Of the five included trials one trial compared ampicillin plus gentamicin with benzylpenicillin plus gentamicin; one trial compared piperacillin plus tazobactam with amikacin; one trial compared ticarcillin plus clavulanic acid with piperacillin plus gentamicin; one trial compared piperacillin with ampicillin plus amikacin; and one trial compared ceftazidime with benzylpenicillin plus gentamicin. None of the five comparisons found any evidence of a difference when assessing all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, circulatory support, nephrotoxicity, neurological developmental impairment, or necrotising enterocolitis; however, none of the trials were near an information size that could contribute significantly to the evidence of the comparative benefits and risks of any particular antibiotic regimen. None of the trials assessed respiratory support or ototoxicity. The benefits and harms of different antibiotic regimens remain unclear due to the lack of well-powered trials and the high risk of systematic errors.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Current evidence is insufficient to support any antibiotic regimen being superior to another. Large RCTs assessing different antibiotic regimens in early-onset neonatal sepsis with low risk of bias are warranted.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Bias; Cause of Death; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Neonatal Sepsis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 33998666
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013837.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2021Neonatal sepsis is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. It is the third leading cause of neonatal mortality globally constituting 13% of overall neonatal mortality....
BACKGROUND
Neonatal sepsis is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. It is the third leading cause of neonatal mortality globally constituting 13% of overall neonatal mortality. Despite the high burden of neonatal sepsis, high-quality evidence in diagnosis and treatment is scarce. Due to the diagnostic challenges of sepsis and the relative immunosuppression of the newborn, many neonates receive antibiotics for suspected sepsis. Antibiotics have become the most used therapeutics in neonatal intensive care units, and observational studies in high-income countries suggest that 83% to 94% of newborns treated with antibiotics for suspected sepsis have negative blood cultures. The last Cochrane Review was updated in 2005. There is a need for an updated systematic review assessing the effects of different antibiotic regimens for late-onset neonatal sepsis.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of different antibiotic regimens for late-onset neonatal sepsis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following electronic databases: CENTRAL (2021, Issue 3); Ovid MEDLINE; Embase Ovid; CINAHL; LILACS; Science Citation Index EXPANDED and Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science on 12 March 2021. We also searched clinical trials databases and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included RCTs comparing different antibiotic regimens for late-onset neonatal sepsis. We included participants older than 72 hours of life at randomisation, suspected or diagnosed with neonatal sepsis, meningitis, osteomyelitis, endocarditis, or necrotising enterocolitis. We excluded trials that assessed treatment of fungal infections.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence. Our primary outcome was all-cause mortality, and our secondary outcomes were: serious adverse events, respiratory support, circulatory support, nephrotoxicity, neurological developmental impairment, necrotising enterocolitis, and ototoxicity. Our primary time point of interest was at maximum follow-up.
MAIN RESULTS
We included five RCTs (580 participants). All trials were at high risk of bias, and had very low-certainty evidence. The five included trials assessed five different comparisons of antibiotics. We did not conduct a meta-analysis due to lack of relevant data. Of the five included trials one trial compared cefazolin plus amikacin with vancomycin plus amikacin; one trial compared ticarcillin plus clavulanic acid with flucloxacillin plus gentamicin; one trial compared cloxacillin plus amikacin with cefotaxime plus gentamicin; one trial compared meropenem with standard care (ampicillin plus gentamicin or cefotaxime plus gentamicin); and one trial compared vancomycin plus gentamicin with vancomycin plus aztreonam. None of the five comparisons found any evidence of a difference when assessing all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, circulatory support, nephrotoxicity, neurological developmental impairment, or necrotising enterocolitis; however, none of the trials were near an information size that could contribute significantly to the evidence of the comparative benefits and risks of any particular antibiotic regimen. None of the trials assessed respiratory support or ototoxicity. The benefits and harms of different antibiotic regimens remain unclear due to the lack of well-powered trials and the high risk of systematic errors.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Current evidence is insufficient to support any antibiotic regimen being superior to another. RCTs assessing different antibiotic regimens in late-onset neonatal sepsis with low risks of bias are warranted.
Topics: Amikacin; Ampicillin; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Aztreonam; Bias; Cefazolin; Clavulanic Acid; Drug Therapy, Combination; Floxacillin; Gentamicins; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Neonatal Sepsis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Ticarcillin; Vancomycin
PubMed: 33998665
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013836.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2020Chronic suppurative otitis media (CSOM), sometimes referred to as chronic otitis media (COM), is a chronic inflammation and often polymicrobial infection (involving more... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Chronic suppurative otitis media (CSOM), sometimes referred to as chronic otitis media (COM), is a chronic inflammation and often polymicrobial infection (involving more than one micro-organism) of the middle ear and mastoid cavity, characterised by ear discharge (otorrhoea) through a perforated tympanic membrane. The predominant symptoms of CSOM are ear discharge and hearing loss. Topical antibiotics, the most common treatment for CSOM, act to kill or inhibit the growth of micro-organisms that may be responsible for the infection. Antibiotics can be used alone or in addition to other treatments for CSOM, such as antiseptics or ear cleaning (aural toileting).
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of topical antibiotics (without steroids) for people with CSOM.
SEARCH METHODS
The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL via the Cochrane Register of Studies); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; CINAHL; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 1 April 2019.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with at least a one-week follow-up involving participants (adults and children) who had chronic ear discharge of unknown cause or CSOM, where the ear discharge had continued for more than two weeks. The interventions were any single, or combination of, topical antibiotic agent(s) of any class, applied directly into the ear canal as ear drops, powders or irrigations, or as part of an aural toileting procedure. The two main comparisons were topical antibiotic compared to a) placebo or no intervention and b) another topical antibiotic (e.g. topical antibiotic A versus topical antibiotic B). Within each comparison we separated studies where both groups of participants had received topical antibiotic a) alone or with aural toileting and b) on top of background treatment (such as systemic antibiotics).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used the standard Cochrane methodological procedures. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. Our primary outcomes were: resolution of ear discharge or 'dry ear' (whether otoscopically confirmed or not), measured at between one week and up to two weeks, two weeks to up to four weeks and after four weeks; health-related quality of life using a validated instrument; ear pain (otalgia) or discomfort or local irritation. Secondary outcomes included hearing, serious complications and ototoxicity measured in several ways.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 17 studies with a total of 2198 participants. Twelve studies reported the sample size in terms of participants (not ears); these had a total of 1797 participants. The remaining five studies reported both the number of participants and ears, representing 401 participants, or 510 ears. A: Topical antibiotics versus placebo or no treatment (with aural toilet in both arms and no other background treatment) One small study compared a topical antibiotic (ciprofloxacin) with placebo (saline). All participants received aural toilet. Although ciprofloxacin was better than saline in terms of resolution of discharge at one to two weeks: 84% versus 12% (risk ratio (RR) 6.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.82 to 24.99; 35 participants, very low-certainty evidence), the very low certainty of the evidence means that it is very uncertain whether or not one intervention is better or worse than the other. The study authors reported that "no medical side-effects and worsening of audiological measurements related to this topical medication were detected" (very low-certainty evidence). B: Topical antibiotics versus placebo or no treatment (with use of oral antibiotics in both arms) Four studies compared topical ciprofloxacin to no treatment (three studies; 190 participants) or topical ceftizoxime to no treatment (one study; 248 participants). In each study all participants received the same antibiotic systemically (oral ciprofloxacin, injected ceftizoxime). In at least one study all participants received aural toilet. Useable data were only available from the first three studies; ciprofloxacin was better than no treatment, resolution of discharge occurring in 88.2% versus 60% at one to two weeks (RR 1.47, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.80; 2 studies, 150 participants; low-certainty evidence). None of the studies reported ear pain or discomfort/local irritation. C: Comparisons of different topical antibiotics The certainty of evidence for all outcomes in these comparisons is very low. Quinolones versus aminoglycosides Seven studies compared an aminoglycoside (gentamicin, neomycin or tobramycin) with ciprofloxacin (734 participants) or ofloxacin (214 participants). Whilst resolution of discharge at one to two weeks was higher in the quinolones group the very low certainty of the evidence means that it is very uncertain whether or not one intervention is better or worse than the other (RR 1.95, 95% CI 0.88 to 4.29; 6 studies, 694 participants). One study measured ear pain and reported no difference between the groups. Quinolones versus aminoglycosides/polymyxin B combination ±gramicidin We identified three studies but data on our primary outcome were only available in one study. Comparing ciprofloxacin to a neomycin/polymyxin B/gramicidin combination, for an unknown treatment duration (likely four weeks), ciprofloxacin was better (RR 1.12, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.22, 186 participants). A "few" patients experienced local irritation upon the first instillation of topical treatment (numbers/groups not stated). Others Other studies examined topical gentamicin versus a trimethoprim/sulphacetamide/polymixin B combination (91 participants) and rifampicin versus chloramphenicol (160 participants). Limited data were available and the findings were very uncertain.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We are uncertain about the effectiveness of topical antibiotics in improving resolution of ear discharge in patients with CSOM because of the limited amount of low-quality evidence available. However, amongst this uncertainty there is some evidence to suggest that the use of topical antibiotics may be effective when compared to placebo, or when used in addition to a systemic antibiotic. There is also uncertainty about the relative effectiveness of different types of antibiotics; it is not possible to determine with any certainty whether or not quinolones are better or worse than aminoglycosides. These two groups of compounds have different adverse effect profiles, but there is insufficient evidence from the included studies to make any comment about these. In general, adverse effects were poorly reported.
Topics: Administration, Topical; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Chronic Disease; Humans; Otitis Media, Suppurative; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31896168
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013051.pub2 -
JAC-antimicrobial Resistance Dec 2021Ototoxicity has been reported after administration of aminoglycosides and glycopeptides. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Ototoxicity has been reported after administration of aminoglycosides and glycopeptides.
OBJECTIVES
To identify available evidence for the occurrence and determinants of aminoglycoside- and glycopeptide-related ototoxicity in children.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Systematic electronic literature searches that combined ototoxicity (hearing loss, tinnitus and/or vertigo) with intravenous aminoglycoside and/or glycopeptide administration in children were performed in PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases. Studies with sample sizes of ≥50 children were included. The QUIPS tool and Cochrane criteria were used to assess the quality and risk of bias of included studies.
RESULTS
Twenty-nine aminoglycoside-ototoxicity studies met the selection criteria (including 7 randomized controlled trials). Overall study quality was medium/low. The frequency of hearing loss within these studies ranged from 0%-57%, whereas the frequency of tinnitus and vertigo ranged between 0%-53% and 0%-79%, respectively. Two studies met the criteria on glycopeptide-induced ototoxicity and reported hearing loss frequencies of 54% and 55%. Hearing loss frequencies were higher in gentamicin-treated children compared to those treated with other aminoglycosides. In available studies aminoglycosides had most often been administered concomitantly with platinum agents, diuretics and other co-medication.
CONCLUSIONS
In children the reported occurrence of aminoglycoside/glycopeptide ototoxicity highly varies and seems to depend on the diagnosis, aminoglycoside subtype and use of co-administered medication. More research is needed to investigate the prevalence and determinants of aminoglycoside/glycopeptide ototoxicity. Our results indicate that age-dependent audiological examination may be considered for children frequently treated with aminoglycosides/glycopeptides especially if combined with other ototoxic medication.
PubMed: 34917943
DOI: 10.1093/jacamr/dlab184 -
International Archives of... Jan 2022Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are antimalarial drugs widely used in the treatment of rheumatic diseases. With the global pandemic caused by the new coronavirus,... (Review)
Review
Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are antimalarial drugs widely used in the treatment of rheumatic diseases. With the global pandemic caused by the new coronavirus, there was an increase in the prescription of these drugs, which led to a major concern regarding their ototoxic effects. The objective of the present study was to assess existing scientific evidence about the toxic effects of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine on the peripheral and/or central auditory system. A systematic literature review was performed by searching the PubMed (Medline), Scopus, Web of Science, LILACS, and SciELO electronic databases, in a search of articles that fullfiled the predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The review was conducted in three phases and, in all of them, analyses were performed by two independent researchers. Disagreements were discussed with a third researcher until a consensus was reached. A total of 437 articles were found and 8 were included in this review. Seven of the included studies reported hearing loss in their samples and presented a diagnostic hypothesis of ototoxicity induced by chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine. The most common type of hearing loss was sensorineural, with varying laterality and degrees of severity. The most frequently used audiological test was pure tone audiometry, and only two studies assessed brainstem evoked responses. The scientific evidence compiled in this research showed that chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine have an ototoxic effect in the peripheral auditory system. These drugs can cause cochlear damage, including changes in the stria vascularis and lesions in sensory hair cells.
PubMed: 35096175
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1740986 -
Radiation Oncology (London, England) Jun 2023The risk of ototoxicity, characterized by hearing impairment, tinnitus, or middle ear inflammation, is elevated in both child and adult cancer survivors who have...
BACKGROUND
The risk of ototoxicity, characterized by hearing impairment, tinnitus, or middle ear inflammation, is elevated in both child and adult cancer survivors who have undergone head-neck or brain radiation, or a combination of the two. To provide optimal care for these cancer survivors and minimize subsequent complications, it is crucial to comprehend the relationship between radiotherapy and ototoxicity.
METHODS
A comprehensive search of databases, including the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science, was conducted from the inception of the knowledge base up until January 2023. The metafor-package was employed to compare ototoxicity rates in individuals receiving radiotherapy. Two independent assessors extracted data and analyzed targets using a random-effects model.
RESULTS
Out of the 28 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) included in the analysis, 25 were prospective RCTs. Subgroup analysis revealed that mean cochlear radiation dose, primary tumor location, radiotherapy modality, and patient age significantly influenced total hearing impairment. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy was associated with less ototoxicity than 2D conventional radiotherapy (OR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.47-0.60; P = 0.73; I = 0%). Stereotactic radiotherapy appeared to be a superior option for hearing preservation compared to radiosurgery (OR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.00-2.07; P = 0.69; I = 0%). Children demonstrated a higher risk of hearing impairment than adults. More than 50% of patients with vestibular neuroadenoma experienced hearing impairment following radiation therapy. A strong association was observed between the average cochlear radiation dose and hearing impairment. Increased cochlear radiation doses may result in a heightened risk of hearing impairment.
CONCLUSION
Several risk factors for radiation-induced hearing impairment were identified in this study. High cochlear radiation doses were found to exacerbate the risk of hearing impairment resulting from radiation therapy.
Topics: Adult; Child; Humans; Hearing; Hearing Loss; Ototoxicity; Radiosurgery; Radiotherapy; Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated
PubMed: 37270526
DOI: 10.1186/s13014-023-02268-7 -
Otolaryngology--head and Neck Surgery :... Jun 2023The objective of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the impact of genetic polymorphisms on platinum-based chemotherapy (PBC)-induced ototoxicity. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the impact of genetic polymorphisms on platinum-based chemotherapy (PBC)-induced ototoxicity.
DATA SOURCES
Systematic searches of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science were conducted from the inception of the databases to May 31, 2022. Abstracts and presentations from conferences were also reviewed.
REVIEW METHODS
Four investigators independently extracted data in adherence to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Differences in the prevalence of PBC-induced ototoxicity between reference and variant (i) genotypes and (ii) alleles were analyzed. The overall effect size was presented using the random-effects model as an odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI).
RESULTS
From 32 included articles, 59 single nucleotide polymorphisms on 28 genes were identified, with 4406 total unique participants. For allele frequency analysis, the A allele in ACYP2 rs1872328 was positively associated with ototoxicity (OR: 2.61; 95% CI: 1.06-6.43; n = 2518). Upon limiting to cisplatin use only, the T allele of COMT rs4646316 and COMT rs9332377 revealed significant results. For genotype frequency analysis, the CT/TT genotype in ERCC2 rs1799793 demonstrated an otoprotective effect (OR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.27-0.94; n = 176). Excluding studies using carboplatin or concomitant radiotherapy revealed significant effects with COMT rs4646316, GSTP1 rs1965, and XPC rs2228001. Major sources of variations between studies include differences in patient demographics, ototoxicity grading systems, and treatment protocols.
CONCLUSION
Our meta-analysis presents polymorphisms that exert ototoxic or otoprotective effects in patients undergoing PBC. Importantly, several of these alleles are observed at high frequencies globally, highlighting the potential for polygenic screening and cumulative risk evaluation for personalized care.
Topics: Humans; Antineoplastic Agents; Ototoxicity; Platinum; Cisplatin; Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide; Xeroderma Pigmentosum Group D Protein; Acid Anhydride Hydrolases
PubMed: 36802061
DOI: 10.1002/ohn.222 -
Audiology Research Jul 2022This systematic review investigates ear cooling and cryotherapy in the prevention and treatment of inner ear damage and disease, within the context of animal models and... (Review)
Review
This systematic review investigates ear cooling and cryotherapy in the prevention and treatment of inner ear damage and disease, within the context of animal models and clinical studies. A literature search was carried out in the databases Pubmed and Cochrane Library. Ten studies were identified concerning the otoprotective properties of cryotherapy. Nine of these were rodent in vivo studies (mice, rats, gerbils, guinea pigs). One study involved human subjects and investigated cryotherapy in idiopathic sensorineural hearing loss. The studies were heterogeneous in their goals, methods, and the models used. Disorder models included ischemia and noise damage, ototoxicity (cisplatin and aminoglycoside), and CI-electrode insertion. All ten studies demonstrated significant cryotherapeutic otoprotection for their respective endpoints. No study revealed or expressly investigated otodestructive effects. While limited in number, all of the studies within the scope of the review demonstrated some degree of cryotherapeutic, otoprotective effect. These promising results support the conducting of further work to explore and refine the clinical applicability and impact of cryotherpeutics in otolaryngology.
PubMed: 35892664
DOI: 10.3390/audiolres12040038 -
Supportive Care in Cancer : Official... Oct 2023Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are related to various immune-related adverse events (irAEs). However, the knowledge is limited with rare irAEs like hearing loss.... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are related to various immune-related adverse events (irAEs). However, the knowledge is limited with rare irAEs like hearing loss. Therefore, we evaluated the characteristics, presentation, and treatment of ICI-related hearing loss by reviewing the individual patient data from the previous studies.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic search of the Web of Science, PubMed, and Embase databases for studies published until 17 November 2022. The selected MeSH search terms were "hearing loss" OR "hearing impairment" OR "ototoxicity" OR "vestibular toxicity" OR "audiovestibular toxicity" AND "immune checkpoint inhibitor" OR "immunotherapy."
RESULTS
A total of 38 patients were included. Melanoma was the most frequent diagnosis (73.7%). The median time from ICI initiation to hearing loss development was 3 months. The hearing impairment was secondary to bilateral sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) in 24 (68.6%) patients, and at least one other irAE accompanied the hearing loss in 24 patients. Hearing loss significantly improved in 45.7% of the patients. The overall response rate and disease control rate were 67.6% and 85.3%, respectively.
CONCLUSION
We observed that most cases of ICI-related hearing loss were reversible, observed in patients with melanoma, accompanied by other irAEs, and associated with a high response rate to ICIs. With the expanded use of ICIs in the earlier treatment lines and adjuvant settings, the number of survivors with ICI-related hearing loss is expected to increase. Further research is needed to define the true prevalence of ICI-related hearing loss, optimal diagnosis, and management.
Topics: Humans; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors; Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological; Melanoma; Hearing Loss; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37819422
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-023-08083-w -
Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology 2022Platinum-based chemotherapeutics play an important role in the treatment of cancer at different levels and are the most cited ototoxic agents when scientific evidence is... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Platinum-based chemotherapeutics play an important role in the treatment of cancer at different levels and are the most cited ototoxic agents when scientific evidence is analyzed.
OBJECTIVE
To present scientific evidence based on a systematic literature review, PRISMA, in order to systematize information on the ototoxic effects of using antineoplastic drugs.
METHODS
For the selection of studies, the combination based on the Medical Subject Heading Terms (MeSH) was used. The Medline (Pubmed), LILACS, SciELO, SCOPUS, WEB OF SCIENCE and BIREME databases were used, without restriction of language, period, and location. Evaluation of the quality of the articles was carried out, which included articles with a minimum score of 6 in the modified scale of the literature. The designs of the selected studies were descriptive, cohort, and cross-sectional, which were related to the research objective.
RESULTS
Three articles were included in this systematic review. The ototoxicity caused by cisplatin alone varied from 45% to 83.3%, while that caused by the use associated with carboplatin varied from 16.6% to 75%. There was a significant variation in the cumulative doses of these antineoplastic agents, both in isolated and in combination. Auditory changes, especially at high frequencies, were evident after completion of treatment.
CONCLUSION
Auditory changes after the use of platinum-based antineoplastic drugs were found, however, there was an important heterogeneity regarding the frequency of ototoxicity and the cumulative dose of the drugs used.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Cisplatin; Cross-Sectional Studies; Hearing Loss; Humans; Ototoxicity
PubMed: 33757754
DOI: 10.1016/j.bjorl.2021.02.008