Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41136563›Full record

SynthesisEuropean 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 Surgery2026

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of intratympanic application of different corticosteroids: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Salmah M Alharbi, Abdulrahman Alsanosi, Talat Essa Ardi, Yahya Dhafer Abdullah Al Ahmari, Majed Assiri, Mohammed A Al-Hamoud, Mona Ali Alshehri

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-AnalysisComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in 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, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

7 authors.

Salmah M AlharbiDepartment of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Khamis Mushait General Hospital, Khamis Mushait, Saudi Arabia. salmah.alharbi33@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6569-1397
Abdulrahman AlsanosiDepartment of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Talat Essa ArdiDepartment of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Aseer Central Hospital, Abha, Saudi Arabia.
Yahya Dhafer Abdullah Al AhmariDepartment of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Aseer Central Hospital, Abha, Saudi Arabia.
Majed AssiriDepartment of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Cochlear Implant Centre, Aseer Health Cluster, Abha, Saudi Arabia.
Mohammed A Al-HamoudDepartment of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Ahad Rufaidah General Hospital, Ahad Rufaidah, Saudi Arabia.
Mona Ali AlshehriDepartment of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Aseer Central Hospital, Abha, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of different types of intratympanic corticosteroids for treating idiopathic sensorineural hearing loss (ISSNHL).

methodsMEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Web of Science databases were systematically searched for clinical trials and cohort studies published from inception until the 28th of October 2024. The outcomes included the change in mean hearing threshold with pure tone audiometry (PTA average) (primary) as well as the percentage of patients with improved hearing, the final hearing threshold with PTA, the change in hearing threshold with speech audiometry, and adverse events. (secondary). The results were pooled as standardized mean difference (SMD) and risk ratio (RR) for numerical and dichotomous outcomes, respectively.

resultsEleven studies were included. The pooled results did not reveal a significant improvement in PTA average with methylprednisolone compared to dexamethasone (number of studies = 5; number of participants = 430; pooled SMD [95% CI] = 0.31 [-0.10, 0.72], P = 0.100). The results showed that methylprednisolone was significantly associated with achieving satisfactory response (complete or partial recovery) (number of studies = 6; number of participants = 498; pooled RR [95% CI] = 1.32 [1.11, 1.56], P = 0.002).

conclusionThe current evidence suggests that methylprednisolone potentially possesses an efficacy advantage compared to dexamethasone in terms of higher recovery rates in patients with ISSNHL. The evidence quality is downgraded by the limitations of the included studies and the observed wide clinical heterogeneity. There is a need for the conduct of high-quality randomized clinical trials to investigate the superiority of intratympanic methylprednisolone compared to intratympanic dexamethasone in patients with ISSNHL.

Indexed as

DexamethasoneGlucocorticoidsHearing Loss, SensorineuralMethylprednisoloneAudiometry, Pure-ToneHumansInjection, IntratympanicTreatment OutcomeDexamethasoneGlucocorticoidsMethylprednisoloneDexamethasoneIdiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing lossIntratympanic injectionMeta-analysisMethylprednisolone

Identifiers

PMID41136563

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.