Trial reportHNO2010
[Rheopheresis for recurrent sudden hearing loss : therapeutic options for patients refractory to infusion therapy].
Trial report in HNO, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Randomized, placebo-controlled study on efficacy, safety and tolerability of drug-induced defibrinogenation for sudden sensorineural hearing loss: the lessons learned.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2023Trial
- Rheopheresis in treatment of idiopathic sensorineural sudden hearing loss.Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale · 2017Observational
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveFor patients suffering from recurrent sudden hearing loss (SHL) that is refractory to infusion therapy, new therapeutic options must be established. PATIENTS AND
methodsPatients suffering from recurrent and progressive SHL refractory to infusion therapy according to German guidelines were analysed retrospectively. After unsuccessful infusion therapy following the last onset of SHL, patients were treated with Rheopheresis twice. Hearing gain and recovery of speech discrimination were analysed.
resultsTwenty-five patients with a mean of 2.1+/-0.4 events of SHL within 30.0+/-21.6 months were examined. The patients' mean hearing loss before the first onset of SHL was 34 dB and was reduced by infusion therapy to 20 dB. With the second onset of SHL, hearing loss remained almost unchanged after infusion therapy. Patients showed a mean improvement of 20 dB after two consecutive Rheopheresis treatments. Forty percent showed complete remission of SHL, and a further 28% showed partial remission.
conclusionRheopheresis can efficiently improve the hearing of patients with recurrent SHL refractory to infusion therapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
20182682What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.