Update on diagnostic procedures in third window syndromes.

Julia Dlugaiczyk, Sebastian Rösch, Georgios Mantokoudis

Abstract readReview

In one paragraph

Review in HNO, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Julia DlugaiczykDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery & Interdisciplinary Center of Vertigo, Balance and Ocular Motor Disorders, University Hospital Zurich (USZ), University of Zurich (UZH), Rämistrasse 100, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland. julia.dlugaiczyk@usz.ch.

Sebastian RöschDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria.

Georgios MantokoudisDepartment for Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Inselspital University Hospital Bern, Bern, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe diagnosis of third window syndromes often poses a challenge in clinical practice.

objectiveThis paper provides an overview of diagnostic procedures in third window syndromes, with special emphasis on superior canal dehiscence syndrome (SCDS), large vestibular aqueduct syndrome (LVAS), and X-chromosomal malformation of the cochlea. MATERIALS AND

methodsA literature search was performed in PubMed up to December 2023. Furthermore, a selection of the authors' own cases is presented.

resultsAudiovestibular tests for the diagnosis of third window syndromes are most often reported for patients with SCDS in the literature. In this context, cut-off values with different sensitivities and specificities have been defined for different outcome parameters of vestibular evoked myogenic potentials. Current developments include the application of electrocochleography, broadband tympanometry, video head impulse testing, and vibration-induced nystagmus. Genetic analyses are increasingly applied in LVAS.

conclusionThe diagnosis of third window syndromes is always based on the synthesis of patients' symptoms, clinical signs, audiovestibular test results, and imaging.

Indexed as

Genetic Diseases, X-LinkedHearing Loss, SensorineuralSemicircular Canal DehiscenceVestibular AqueductCochleaHumansAudiometryElectrocochleographyEnlarged vestibular aqueductSuperior canal dehiscence syndromeVestibular evoked myogenic potentials

Identifiers

PMID40745485

DOI10.1007/s00106-024-01467-2

PMCPMC12672709

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.