International Journal of Clinical Research
International Journal of Clinical Research. 2024; 8: (12) ; 10.12208/j.ijcr.20240503 .
总浏览量: 122
暨南大学珠海临床医学院(珠海市人民医院) 广东珠海
*通讯作者: 刘谦虚,单位:暨南大学珠海临床医学院(珠海市人民医院) 广东珠海;
目的 利用Meta分析的方法探讨高剂量和标准剂量糖皮质激素治疗突发性聋的疗效与安全性。方法 通过关键词在中国知网、维普等数据库系统检索2000~2024年国内外公开发表的关于不同高剂量全身应用糖皮质激素治疗突发性聋的相关文献。根据预先制定的纳入和排除标准筛选文献,使用RevMan5.4.1软件包对符合质量标准的研究进行Meta分析。结果 纳入了4个随机对照研究,患者总数为462例,Meta分析显示高剂量与标准剂量全身应用糖皮质激素治疗突发性聋的总有效率差异有统计学意义(RR=1.39,95% CI= 1.13-1.69,P=0.001);痊愈率无统计学差异(RR=1.50,95%CI=0.89-2.55,P=0.13)。药物不良反应主要包括消化系统反应、血糖升高、失眠、肝肾损伤等,两组之间不良反应差异无统计学意义(RR=1.02,95%CI=0.76-1.37,P=0.88)。结论 1.高剂量相较于标准剂量糖皮质激素治疗突发性聋具有更高的有效率,然而在痊愈率方面并未呈现出显著差异,尚需进行更深入的研究与探讨。2.高剂量与标准剂量糖皮质激素治疗突发性聋在不良反应发生率方面并无明显差异。
Objective To explore the efficacy and safety of high-dose and standard-dose glucocorticoids in the treatment of sudden deafness using the method of meta-analysis. Methods The relevant literature published in China from 2000 to 2024 on different high-dose systemic glucocorticoids for the treatment of sudden deafness was systematically retrieved using keywords in databases such as CNKI and VIP. Literature was screened according to the pre-established inclusion and exclusion criteria, and the RevMan5.4.1 software package was used to perform a meta-analysis on studies that met the quality standards. Results Four randomized controlled studies with a total of 462 patients were included. Meta-analysis showed that there was a statistically significant difference in the total effective rate between high-dose and standard-dose systemic glucocorticoids for the treatment of sudden deafness (RR=1.39, 95%CI=1.13-1.69, P=0.001); there was no statistical difference in the cure rate (RR=1.50, 95%CI=0.89-2.55, P=0.13). Adverse drug reactions mainly included digestive system reactions, increased blood sugar, insomnia, liver and kidney damage, etc. There was no statistically significant difference in adverse reactions between the two groups (RR=1.02, 95%CI=0.76-1.37, P=0.88). Conclusion 1. High-dose glucocorticoids have a higher efficacy in the treatment of sudden deafness than standard-dose glucocorticoids, but there is no significant difference in the cure rate, which requires further research and discussion. 2. There is no significant difference in the incidence of adverse reactions between high-dose and standard-dose glucocorticoids in the treatment of sudden deafness.
[1] 中华耳鼻咽喉头颈外科杂志编辑委员会,中华医学会耳鼻咽喉头颈外科学分会.突发性聋诊断和治疗指南(2015)[J].中华耳鼻咽喉头颈外科杂志,2015,50(6):443-447.
[2] 庄丽.甲泼尼龙治疗突发性聋的临床效果观察[J].中国医药指南,2023,21(27):74-76.
[3] 张彤云,张晓英.突发性聋治疗中激素剂量及疗程对疗效的影响[J].广西医科大学学报,2017,34(11):1627-1629.
[4] 朱皓华.地塞米松与甲泼尼龙治疗突发性聋的临床效果比较[J].当代医学,2016,22(10):160-161.
[5] 郭焕萍,陆冬凌,陈翠芳,等.关于激素冲击治疗在突发性聋的应用[J].中国现代药物应用,2016,10(17):230-231.
[6] 塞娜,韩维举.感音神经性聋相关内耳免疫及炎症机制的研究 进展[J].中华耳科学杂志,2018,16(2):221-226.[J].
[7] 王荣国,高洁 对比局部与全身应用激素治疗突发性耳聋耳鸣的近期疗效 . 世界最新医学信息文摘(连续型电子期刊), 2020 ,20 (72):320-321
[8] 韩想利,张文,曹亚茹,等 鼓阶注射手术治疗重度突发性耳聋临床研究 . 陕西医学杂志, 2019 ,48 (1) :42-44.