ArticleJournal of clinical medicine research2017
Study of Methylene Blue Ototoxicity in the Guinea Pig.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparative Study Regarding the Properties of Methylene Blue and Proflavine and Their Optimal Concentrations for In Vitro and In Vivo Applications.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
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
backgroundMethylene blue is widely used in the medical field, especially as a blue dye for staining. It is also used as a photosensitizing agent in antimicrobial photodynamic therapy, which once photoactivated is effective for the eradication of several multi-resistant bacteria. The objective of this study was to investigate the ototoxic potential of methylene blue and precise its use in otology.
methodsIt was a prospective animal study performed on guinea pigs in our tertiary medical center. We divided the animals into two groups: an experimental group and a control group, who underwent a series of three intratympanic (IT) injections. In the control group (n = 10), they received injections of gentamicin in one ear (positive control) and normal saline in the contralateral ear (negative control). The experimental group (n = 10) received injections of methylene blue in one ear, compared to injections of normal saline in the contralateral ear. We conducted auditory-evoked brainstem response (ABR) before and 1 week after the injection series. Once this is completed, the cochlea was dissected and caspase-3 was analyzed by immunohistochemistry.
resultsThe mean difference of hearing loss in the methylene blue group compared to normal saline was 1.50 dB, and it was not shown to be statistically significant (P = 0.688). For the positive control group, which received IT injections of gentamicin, the mean threshold of hearing loss difference for all the frequencies combined was 66.25 dB (P < 0.001). Furthermore, uptake of caspase-3 by immunohistochemistry (apoptotic marker) was negative in our group, which received injections of methylene blue.
conclusionIn light of our results, IT injections of methylene blue did not demonstrate an ototoxic potential. We recommend further studies to precise its use in the otologic field.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.