Efficacy of intratympanic injection versus intravenous drip of prednisolone acetate in the treatment of sudden hearing loss
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1008-6706.2022.06.011
- VernacularTitle:鼓室内注射与静脉滴注泼尼松龙治疗突发性聋的疗效比较
- Author:
Qinghua HU
1
;
Weiwei GAO
;
Zhuliang SHI
Author Information
1. 宁波明州医院耳鼻喉科，宁波 315100
- Keywords:
Hearing loss,sensorineural;
Drug administration routes;
Injections,intravenous;
Injection,intratympanic;
Prednisolone;
C-reactive potein;
Hearing tests;
Drug
- From:
Chinese Journal of Primary Medicine and Pharmacy
2022;29(6):852-856
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To investigate the efficacy of intratympanic injection versus intravenous drip of prednisolone acetate in the treatment of sudden hearing loss. Methods:A total of 120 patients with sudden hearing loss who received treatment in the Department of Otolaryngology, Mingzhou Hospital between January 2017 and January 2020 were included in this study. They were divided into intratympanic injection group (intratympanic injection of prednisolone acetate, n = 60) and intravenous injection group (intravenous injection of prednisolone acetate, n = 60) according to route of drug administration. After 8 days of treatment, clinical efficacy was compared between the two groups. The hearing thresholds at 500 Hz and 1 000 Hz in both groups were detected using pure tone audiometry. The levels of procalcitonin and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein and adverse drug reactions were compared between the two groups. Results:After treatment, total response rate in the intratympanic injection group was significantly higher than that in the intravenous injection group (93.33% vs. 80.00%, χ2 = 4.61, P < 0.05). The hearing threshold at 500 Hz in the intratympanic injection group was significantly lower than that in the intravenous injection group [(38.69 ± 3.56) vs. (42.36 ± 4.36), t = 5.05, P < 0.001). The hearing threshold at 1 000 Hz in the intratympanic injection group was significantly lower than that in the intravenous injection group [(32.36 ± 3.36) vs. (40.15 ± 4.12), t = 11.35, P < 0.001). After treatment, procalcitonin level in the intratympanic injection group was significantly lower than that in the intravenous injection group [(0.65 ± 0.12) μg/L vs. (0.98 ± 0.15) μg/L, t = 13.30, P < 0.001)]. High-sensitivity C-reactive protein level in the intratympanic injection group was significantly lower than that in the intravenous injection group [(3.28 ± 0.36) mg/L vs. (5.26 ± 0.56) mg/L, t = 23.03, P < 0.001]. There was no significant difference in incidence of adverse reactions between intratympanic injection and intravenous injection groups (8.33% vs. 10.00%, χ2 = 0.10, P > 0.05). Conclusion:Compared with intravenous drip of prednisolone acetate, intratympanic injection of prednisolone acetate can improve the clinical symptoms of patients with sudden hearing loss and enhance clinical efficacy.
