ArticleThe Laryngoscope2026
Mesna in Otologic Surgery: Efficacy and Safety-A Scoping Review.
Article in The Laryngoscope, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
objectiveMesna (Sodium 2-mercaptoethanesulfonate) is widely used as a mucolytic agent and uroprotective agent. Recently, its disulfide bond-breaking property has been applied in otologic surgery to facilitate safer dissection of cholesteatoma and other adhesions. This review evaluates the effectiveness and toxicity of Mesna in its various uses of otologic surgeries. DATA SOURCES: A comprehensive literature search was conducted with the aid of a senior medical librarian across eight databases conducted from inception until December 28, 2024: Google Scholar, Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (Ebsco), Cochrane (Wiley), Global Health (Ovid), Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics), Africa Wide Information (Ebsco), and Global Index Medicus (WHO). No language or publication status restrictions were applied. REVIEW
methodsThis review was reported following the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Studies were eligible if they investigated the use of Mesna in otology (human or animal) and reported on either efficacy or toxicity. Two reviewers independently screened all titles/abstracts and full texts, with a third resolving discrepancies. Data were charted on application methods, concentrations, outcomes, and adverse effects and synthesized qualitatively.
resultsEighteen studies (nine human, nine animal) met inclusion criteria. Mesna was effectively used in cholesteatoma surgery, ossicular chain fixation, tympanic tube replacement, and adhesive otitis media. Four percent to one hundred percent Mesna was used, without significant signs of toxicity in animal models and clinical research.
conclusionMesna could be used effectively and safely in otologic surgery. Further research is needed to optimize concentration, method of administration, time of contact, and to quantify its effect. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA.
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.