A systematic review and meta-analysis of intratympanic gentamicin for patients with Ménières disease
Résumé fourni par la source
BACKGROUND: Ménière's disease is a chronic inner ear disorder characterized by recurrent vertigo, tinnitus, aural fullness, and fluctuating sensorineural hearing loss. For patients with debilitating symptoms unresponsive to conservative treatment, intratympanic gentamicin is a therapeutic option. However, its efficacy and safety remain uncertain. AIMS/OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aims to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of intratympanic gentamicin in Ménière's disease, focusing exclusively on randomized controlled trials (RCTs). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify RCTs comparing intratympanic gentamicin with placebo or no treatment. Primary outcomes included vertigo frequency and severity, quality of life, and incidence of serious adverse events. Data were analyzed using the GRADE approach to assess risk of bias and certainty of evidence. RESULTS: Three RCTs were included, demonstrating a significant reduction in vertigo frequency and severity in patients treated with intratympanic gentamicin compared to placebo. However, the evidence quality was rated very low due to small sample sizes and methodological limitations. CONCLUSIONS AND SIGNIFICANCE: Findings suggest that intratympanic gentamicin may reduce vertigo in Ménière's disease. However, due to the limited certainty of the evidence, further research with larger sample sizes and standardized outcome measures is necessary to clarify its benefits and risks.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of intratympanic gentamicin for patients with Ménières disease
- Date Crossref
- 27/05/2025
- Éditeur
- Informa UK Limited
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.