SynthesisBrazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology
The efficacy of corticosteroid after facial nerve neurorrhaphy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trial.
Synthesis in Brazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of ozone and methylprednisolone treatment in facial paralysis: An experimental study.Turkish journal of physical medicine and rehabilitation · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe benefit of corticosteroids following facial nerve neurorrhaphy in the setting of complete transection is questionable. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate corticosteroid efficacy on facial nerve regeneration and functional recovery after complete disruption and neurorrhaphy.
methodsRandomized controlled trials on both human and animal models from Ovid MEDLINE and Ovid EMBASE studying corticosteroid efficacy in complete facial nerve disruption followed by neurorrhaphy were included. Data were extracted and pooled for meta-analysis. The outcomes were evaluated from electrophysiology, histology, and functional recovery. However, no randomized controlled trial in human was performed. Possibly, performing human trials with histopathology may not be feasible in clinical setting.
resultsSix animal studies (248 participants) met inclusion criteria. Electrophysiologic outcomes revealed no differences in latency (Standardized Mean Difference (SMD) = -1.97, 95% CI -7.38 to 3.44, p = 0.47) and amplitude (SMD = 0.37, 95% CI -0.44 to 1.18, p = 0.37) between systemic corticosteroids and controls. When analysis compared topical corticosteroid and control, the results provided no differences in latency (Mean Difference (MD) = 0.10, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.24, p = 0.16) and amplitude (SMD = 0.01, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.10, p = 0.81). In histologic outcomes, the results showed no differences in axon diameter (MD = 0.13, 95% CI -0.15 to 0.41, p = 0.37) between systemic corticosteroid and control; however, the result in myelin thickness (MD = 0.06, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.08, p < 0.05) favored control group. When comparing systemic corticosteroid with control in eye blinking, the results favored control (MD = 1.33, 95% CI 0.60 to 2.06, p = 0.0004).
conclusionsThis evidence did not show potential benefits of systemic or topical corticosteroid deliveries after facial nerve neurorrhaphy in complete transection when evaluating electrophysiologic, histologic, and functional recovery outcomes in animal models.
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.