ArticleClinical and experimental otorhinolaryngology2025
Sarpogrelate Delivered via Osmotic Pump Improves Residual Hearing Preservation After Cochlear Implantation.
Article in Clinical and experimental otorhinolaryngology, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis study evaluated the effects of sarpogrelate, a selective 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT) 2A receptor antagonist, on the preservation of residual hearing and modulation of inflammatory responses following cochlear implantation (CI) in an animal model.
methodsThe damaging effects of CI were simulated in male albino guinea pigs using a dummy electrode. Animals were allocated to three groups: control (n=12, dummy electrode insertion only), SPG-1004 (n=7, low-capacity pump delivering sarpogrelate), and SPG-2004 (n=6, high-capacity pump delivering sarpogrelate). Sarpogrelate was administered via osmotic pumps at two different volumes, and its effects on hearing thresholds, histological outcomes, and expression of inflammation-related genes were assessed. Hearing was evaluated using auditory brainstem response (ABR) thresholds measured at baseline (preoperatively) and at 1, 7, and 30 days postoperatively.
resultsAdministration of sarpogrelate via an osmotic pump resulted in significant hearing preservation across all tested frequencies at 1 month post-surgery (P<0.05) compared with the control group, which underwent dummy electrode insertion only. Histological analysis revealed that cochlear fibrosis and inflammatory cell infiltration were markedly reduced in the sarpogrelate-treated groups, especially in the group receiving the higher pump volume. Gene expression analysis supported these findings by showing a significant reduction in inflammation-related markers in the sarpogrelate-treated groups.
conclusionSarpogrelate exhibited a protective effect against the loss of residual hearing after CI, likely due to its anti-inflammatory and antifibrotic properties. In addition, the osmotic pump enabled controlled, sustained delivery of the drug over time. These findings indicate that administering sarpogrelate via an osmotic pump represents a promising pharmacological strategy for improving postoperative outcomes in CI patients by preserving residual hearing.
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.