Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2021 Sep 1;42(8):e980-e986.
doi: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000003198.

Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy Versus Intratympanic Steroid for Salvage Treatment of Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy Versus Intratympanic Steroid for Salvage Treatment of Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Xia Lei et al. Otol Neurotol. .

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare the efficacy of hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) and intratympanic steroids (ITS) as salvage treatment for patients with refractory sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL).

Data sources: Electronic search was performed in the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, and Wan Fang databases to June 1, 2020.

Methods: For each outcome measure, a forest plot was generated and a pooled relative risk (RR) or mean difference (MD) was calculated. Potential publication bias in the meta-analysis was assessed using funnel plot.

Results: The numbers of cases with hearing improvements and pure tone averages (PTA) changes after salvage treatment were entered into the R software to calculate the pooled effect of HBOT compared with ITS. When pooling the results of the studies reporting the proportion of patients with hearing improvement, a fixed-effects model was used. We calculated the RR and found no significant difference when HBOT compared with ITS (RR = 1.09, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.83-1.42, p = 0.55). With respect to the PTA changes, a fixed-effects model was used. The improvement in the PTA (in dB) was calculated in MD and no significant difference was found between the two groups (MD = 0.55, 95% CI: -1.76-2.86, p = 0.64).

Conclusion: Both HBOT and ITS offer some benefits for refractory SSNHL patients, and there were no significant differences in hearing outcomes between the two modalities. Future RCTs that include large samples are needed to demonstrate superiority of one of the treatments.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors disclose no conflicts of interest.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Stachler RJ, Chandrasekhar SS, Archer SM, et al. Clinical practice guideline: sudden hearing loss. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2012; 146:S1–S35.
    1. Rauch SD. Idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss. N Engl J Med 2008; 359:833–840.
    1. Schreiber BE, Agrup C, Haskard DO, et al. Sudden sensorineural hearing loss. Lancet 2010; 375:1203–1211.
    1. Chandrasekhar SS, Tsai Do BS, Schwartz SR, et al. Clinical practice guideline: sudden hearing loss (update) executive summary. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2019; 161:195–210.
    1. Edizer DT, Çelebi Ö, Hamit B, et al. Recovery of idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss. J Int Adv Otol 2015; 11:122–126.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources