-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2022Idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSNHL) is common, and defined as a sudden decrease in sensorineural hearing sensitivity of unknown aetiology. Systemic... (Review)
Review
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9); PubMed; Ovid Embase; CINAHL; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials (search date 23 September 2021).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.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Dizziness; Hearing Loss, Sensorineural; Humans; Pain; Tympanic Membrane Perforation; Vertigo
PubMed: 35867413
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008080.pub2 -
Audiology & Neuro-otology 2022Ménière's disease is characterized by recurrent episodes of vertigo, hearing loss, and tinnitus, often with a feeling of fullness in the ear. Although betahistine is...
BACKGROUND
Ménière's disease is characterized by recurrent episodes of vertigo, hearing loss, and tinnitus, often with a feeling of fullness in the ear. Although betahistine is thought to be specifically effective for Ménière's disease, no evidence for a benefit from the use of betahistine exists, despite its widespread use. Reassessment of the effect of betahistine for Ménière's disease is now warranted.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, Clinicaltrials.gov, ICTRP, and additional sources for published and unpublished trials, in which betahistine was compared to placebo.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Our outcomes involved vertigo, significant adverse effect (upper gastrointestinal discomfort), hearing loss, tinnitus, aural fullness, other adverse effects, and disease-specific health-related quality of life. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 10 studies: 5 studies used a crossover design and the remaining 5 were parallel-group RCTs. One study with a low risk of bias found no significant difference between the betahistine groups and placebo with respect to vertigo after a long-term follow-up period. No significant difference in the incidence of upper gastrointestinal discomfort was found in 2 studies (low-certainty evidence). No differences in hearing loss, tinnitus, or well-being and disease-specific health-related quality of life were found (low- to very low-certainty of evidence). Data on aural fullness could not be extracted. No significant difference between the betahistine and the placebo groups (low-certainty evidence) could be demonstrated in the other adverse effect outcome with respect to dull headache. The pooled risk ratio for other adverse effect in the long term demonstrated a lower risk in favor of placebo over betahistine.
CONCLUSIONS
High-quality studies evaluating the effect of betahistine on patients with Ménière's disease are lacking. However, one study with low risk of bias found no evidence of a difference in the effect of betahistine on the primary outcome, vertigo, in patients with Ménière's disease when compared to placebo. The main focus of future research should be on the use of comparable outcome measures by means of patient-reported outcome measures.
Topics: Betahistine; Deafness; Humans; Meniere Disease; Syndrome; Tinnitus; Vertigo
PubMed: 34233329
DOI: 10.1159/000515821 -
Cureus Aug 2021Intranasal form of esketamine, the S-enantiomer of racemic ketamine, was approved by the US FDA in 2019 for treatment-resistant depression (TRD) in adults. Since... (Review)
Review
Intranasal form of esketamine, the S-enantiomer of racemic ketamine, was approved by the US FDA in 2019 for treatment-resistant depression (TRD) in adults. Since intranasal esketamine is a newly approved drug with a novel mechanism of action, much still remains unknown in regard to its use in TRD. The objective of this study is to systematically review the latest existing evidence on intranasal esketamine, and provide a better insight into its safety and efficacy in TRD in adults. PubMed, MEDLINE (through PubMed), and Google Scholar were systematically searched from 2016 to 2021, using automation tools. After removal of duplicates and screening on the basis of title/abstract, eligibility criteria were applied and quality appraisal was done independently by two reviewers. A total of 10 studies were selected for the final review which included five clinical trials (three short-term trials, one withdrawal design relapse prevention study, and one long-term study), three post hoc studies, one case/non-case study, and one review article. Out of three short-term clinical trials, only one demonstrated a statistically significant difference between treatment with esketamine plus oral antidepressant (OAD) vs placebo plus OAD. The result of the relapse prevention study showed significantly delayed relapse of depressive symptoms in esketamine plus OAD arm when compared to placebo plus OAD arm. Similarly, the result of the long-term clinical trial showed that the improvement in depressive symptoms was found to be sustained in those using esketamine. The most common adverse effects of esketamine included nausea, dizziness, dissociation, headache, vertigo, somnolence, and dysgeusia (altered sense of taste); most were mild-moderate in severity. One case/non-case study reported rare adverse effects including panic attacks, mania, ataxia, akathisia, self-harm ideation, increased loquacity (talkativeness), and autoscopy. Intranasal esketamine has shown efficacy in reducing depressive symptoms in clinical trials, but the clinical meaningfulness of the treatment effect in the real-world population still needs to be explored. Although the safety profile of esketamine appears to be favorable in most clinical trials, some serious side effects are being reported to the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System, and therefore requires further investigation. More robust clinical trials, especially long-term randomized controlled trials are needed which can help provide a better assessment on the efficacy and safety of intranasal esketamine in the treatment of TRD.
PubMed: 34447651
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.17352 -
Brain Sciences Jul 2022Clinical manifestations of COVID-19 include symptoms of vertigo and dizziness, which is rather unsurprising, since SARS-CoV-2 neurotropism may inflict a broad spectrum... (Review)
Review
Clinical manifestations of COVID-19 include symptoms of vertigo and dizziness, which is rather unsurprising, since SARS-CoV-2 neurotropism may inflict a broad spectrum of neuropathic effects. The widespread nature of central and peripheral audiovestibular pathways suggests that there may be several probable pathophysiological mechanisms. The cytokine storm, CNS infiltration of the virus through ACE 2 receptors, and other systemic factors can be responsible for the significant number of COVID-19 patients reported to experience symptoms of vertigo and dizziness. In this paper, we present a systematic review of clinical studies reporting the detection of dizziness and vertigo as clinical manifestations of COVID-19 and discuss their etiopathogenesis.
PubMed: 35884754
DOI: 10.3390/brainsci12070948 -
Journal of Neurologic Physical Therapy... Jul 2023Benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV) is one of the most common vestibular disorders, and is treated effectively with particle repositioning maneuvers (PRM). The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV) is one of the most common vestibular disorders, and is treated effectively with particle repositioning maneuvers (PRM). The aim of this study was to assess the influence of BPPV and treatment effects of PRM on gait, falls, and fear of falling.
METHODS
Three databases and the reference lists of included articles were systematically searched for studies comparing gait and/or falls between (1) people with BPPV (pwBPPV) and controls and (2) pre- and posttreatment with PRM. The Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools were used to assess risk of bias.
RESULTS
Twenty of the 25 included studies were suitable for meta-analysis. Quality assessment resulted in 2 studies with high risk of bias, 13 with moderate risk, and 10 with low risk. PwBPPV walked slower and demonstrated more sway during tandem walking compared with controls. PwBPPV also walked slower during head rotations. After PRM, gait velocity during level walking increased significantly, and gait became safer according to gait assessment scales. Impairments during tandem walking and walking with head rotations did not improve. The number of fallers was significantly higher for pwBPPV than for controls. After treatment, the number of falls, number of pwBPPV who fell, and fear of falling decreased.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
BPPV increases the odds of falls and negatively impacts spatiotemporal parameters of gait. PRM improves falls, fear of falling, and gait during level walking. Additional rehabilitation might be necessary to improve gait while walking with head movements or tandem walking.Video Abstract available for more insights from the authors (see the Supplemental Digital Content Video, available at: http://links.lww.com/JNPT/A421 ).
Topics: Humans; Benign Paroxysmal Positional Vertigo; Fear; Gait; Walking
PubMed: 36897200
DOI: 10.1097/NPT.0000000000000438 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Mar 2007Menière's disease causes recurrent vertigo, hearing loss, tinnitus, and fullness or pressure in the ear, which mainly affects adults aged 40-60 years. Menière's... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Menière's disease causes recurrent vertigo, hearing loss, tinnitus, and fullness or pressure in the ear, which mainly affects adults aged 40-60 years. Menière's disease is at first progressive but fluctuating, and episodes can occur in clusters. Vertigo usually resolves but hearing deteriorates, and symptoms other than hearing loss and tinnitus usually improve regardless of treatment.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of treatments for acute attacks of Menière's disease; and of interventions to prevent attacks and delay disease progression of Menière's disease? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library and other important databases up to January 2006 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 17 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: anticholinergics, benzodiazepines, betahistine, cinnarizine, dietary modification, diuretics, phenothiazines, psychological support, trimetazidine, vestibular rehabilitation.
Topics: Acute Disease; Administration, Oral; Betahistine; Hearing Loss; Humans; Incidence; Meniere Disease; Tinnitus; Trimetazidine; Vertigo
PubMed: 19454061
DOI: No ID Found -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2023Ménière's disease is a condition that causes recurrent episodes of vertigo, associated with hearing loss and tinnitus. First-line treatments often involve dietary or... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Ménière's disease is a condition that causes recurrent episodes of vertigo, associated with hearing loss and tinnitus. First-line treatments often involve dietary or lifestyle changes, medication or local (intratympanic) treatments. However, surgery may also be considered for people with persistent or severe symptoms. The efficacy of different surgical interventions at preventing vertigo attacks, and their associated symptoms, is currently unclear.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the benefits and harms of surgical interventions versus placebo or no treatment in people with Ménière's disease.
SEARCH METHODS
The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 14 September 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs in adults with definite or probable Ménière's disease comparing ventilation tubes, endolymphatic sac surgery, semi-circular canal plugging/obliteration, vestibular nerve section or labyrinthectomy with either placebo (sham surgery) or no treatment. We excluded studies with follow-up of less than three months, or with a cross-over design (unless data from the first phase of the study could be identified). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were: 1) improvement in vertigo (assessed as a dichotomous outcome - improved or not improved), 2) change in vertigo (assessed as a continuous outcome, with a score on a numerical scale) and 3) serious adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were: 4) disease-specific health-related quality of life, 5) change in hearing, 6) change in tinnitus and 7) other adverse effects. We considered outcomes reported at three time points: 3 to < 6 months, 6 to ≤ 12 months and > 12 months. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We included two studies with a total of 178 participants. One evaluated ventilation tubes compared to no treatment, the other evaluated endolymphatic sac decompression compared to sham surgery. Ventilation tubes We included a single RCT of 148 participants with definite Ménière's disease. It was conducted in a single centre in Japan from 2010 to 2013. Participants either received ventilation tubes with standard medical treatment, or standard medical treatment alone, and were followed up for two years. Some data were reported on the number of participants in whom vertigo resolved, and the effect of the intervention on hearing. Our other primary and secondary outcomes were not reported in this study. This is a single, small study and for all outcomes the certainty of evidence was low or very low. We are unable to draw meaningful conclusions from the numerical results. Endolymphatic sac decompression We also included one RCT of 30 participants that compared endolymphatic sac decompression with sham surgery. This was a single-centre study conducted in Denmark during the 1980s. Follow-up was predominantly conducted at one year, but additional follow-up continued for up to nine years in some participants. Some data were reported on hearing and vertigo (both improvement in vertigo and change in vertigo), but our other outcomes of interest were not reported. Again, this is a single, very small study and we rated the certainty of the evidence as very low for all outcomes. We are therefore unable to draw meaningful conclusions from the numerical results. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We are unable to draw clear conclusions about the efficacy of these surgical interventions for Ménière's disease. We identified evidence for only two of our five proposed comparisons, and we assessed all the evidence as low- or very low-certainty. This means that we have very low confidence that the effects reported are accurate estimates of the true effect of these interventions. Many of the outcomes that we planned to assess were not reported by the studies, such as the impact on quality of life, and adverse effects of the interventions. Consensus on the appropriate outcomes to measure in studies of Ménière's disease is needed (i.e. a core outcome set) in order to guide future studies in this area and enable meta-analyses of the results. This must include appropriate consideration of the potential harms of treatment, as well as the benefits.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Meniere Disease; Tinnitus; Vertigo
PubMed: 36825750
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD015249.pub2 -
Frontiers in Neuroscience 2022Surgical treatment of vertigo is performed with in-depth study of inner ear diseases. Achieving an effective control of vertigo symptoms while reducing damage to hearing...
Surgical treatment of vertigo is performed with in-depth study of inner ear diseases. Achieving an effective control of vertigo symptoms while reducing damage to hearing and reducing surgical complications is the principle followed by scholars studying surgical modalities. Semicircular canal occlusion is aimed at treatment of partial peripheral vertigo disease and has attracted the attention of scholars because of the above advantages. This article provides a review of the origins of semicircular canal occlusion, related basic research, clinical applications, and the effects of surgery on vestibular and hearing function.
PubMed: 36061608
DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2022.977323 -
BMC Neurology May 2014Increasing recent evidence has implicated osteoporosis as a risk factor for benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV). We conducted a systematic review to examine the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Increasing recent evidence has implicated osteoporosis as a risk factor for benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV). We conducted a systematic review to examine the association between osteoporosis and BPPV.
METHODS
Four electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and the China Network Knowledge Infrastructure) were searched to identify all papers, published in either English or Chinese, examining the association between osteoporosis (osteopenia) and BPPV.
RESULTS
Seven studies were eligible for analysis, though these studies included some weaknesses. Most of the studies demonstrated a correlation between osteoporosis (osteopenia) and the occurrence and recurrence of BPPV, especially in older women. Patients with osteoporosis may require more canalith-repositioning procedures.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review provides insight into currently available evidence and elucidates the possible existence of an association between BPPV and osteoporosis (osteopenia). However, the evidence supporting that conclusion is not strong, and further studies are needed to clarify the association between these conditions.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Osteoporosis; Vertigo; Young Adult
PubMed: 24886504
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2377-14-110