OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of glucocorticoid in initial treatment of sudden hearing loss with intratympanic (IT) and systemic ways. METHOD: We searched the database of PubMed, Cochrane, Embase,CBM, CNKI, VIP, Wanfang systematically. Literatures were screened according to the preestablished inclusion and exclusion standards,and all the RCT literatures associated with intratympanic and systemic glucocorticoid in the initial treatment of sudden hearing loss before may 2015 were collected. All the data, which meet the inclusion standards, were analyzed by using Meta-analysis software. RESULT: Among all the qualified literatures, 11 randomized controlled trials were included. A total of 1298 cases were involved, including 521 cases with intratympanic administration, 410 with IV-therapy, and 201 with oral therapy. Meta analysis results showed that there was significant difference of the total effective rate and improvement rate between the intratympanic and systemic administration. Intratympanic injection (P > 0.05) was more effective than systemic administration. There was no significant difference between intratympanic group and oral group (RR = 1.15, 95% CI: 0.92-1.42, P > 0.05). A significant difference of the effective rate occurred between intratympanic group and IV therapy group (RR = 1.17, 95% CI: 1.02-1.34, P < 0.05). The major complications of intratympanic were pain, dizziness/vertigo, which occurred more frequently than systemic therapy group; The major complications of systemic therapy group were hyperglycaemia, loss of appetite and insomnia. CONCLUSION: This study shows that the intratympanic (IT) glucocorticoid for sudden deafness is more effective than the systemic administration. But it was not the first choice in clinical treatment. Further studies are warranted.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of glucocorticoid in initial treatment of sudden hearing loss with intratympanic (IT) and systemic ways. METHOD: We searched the database of PubMed, Cochrane, Embase,CBM, CNKI, VIP, Wanfang systematically. Literatures were screened according to the preestablished inclusion and exclusion standards,and all the RCT literatures associated with intratympanic and systemic glucocorticoid in the initial treatment of sudden hearing loss before may 2015 were collected. All the data, which meet the inclusion standards, were analyzed by using Meta-analysis software. RESULT: Among all the qualified literatures, 11 randomized controlled trials were included. A total of 1298 cases were involved, including 521 cases with intratympanic administration, 410 with IV-therapy, and 201 with oral therapy. Meta analysis results showed that there was significant difference of the total effective rate and improvement rate between the intratympanic and systemic administration. Intratympanic injection (P > 0.05) was more effective than systemic administration. There was no significant difference between intratympanic group and oral group (RR = 1.15, 95% CI: 0.92-1.42, P > 0.05). A significant difference of the effective rate occurred between intratympanic group and IV therapy group (RR = 1.17, 95% CI: 1.02-1.34, P < 0.05). The major complications of intratympanic were pain, dizziness/vertigo, which occurred more frequently than systemic therapy group; The major complications of systemic therapy group were hyperglycaemia, loss of appetite and insomnia. CONCLUSION: This study shows that the intratympanic (IT) glucocorticoid for sudden deafness is more effective than the systemic administration. But it was not the first choice in clinical treatment. Further studies are warranted.