Search

BACKGROUND: Persistent postural-perceptual dizziness (PPPD) is a chronic balance disorder, which is characterised by subjective unsteadiness or dizziness that is worse on standing and with visual stimulation. The condition was only recently defined and therefore the prevalence is currently unknown. However, it is likely to include a considerable number of people with chronic balance problems. The symptoms can be debilitating and have a profound impact on quality of life. At present, little is known about the optimal way to treat this condition. A variety of medications may be used, as well as other treatments, such as vestibular rehabilitation. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of non-pharmacological interventions for persistent postural-perceptual dizziness (PPPD). SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 21 November 2022.SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs in adults with PPPD, which compared any non-pharmacological intervention with either placebo or no treatment. We excluded studies that did not use the Bárány Society criteria to diagnose PPPD, and studies that followed up participants for less than three months. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were: 1) improvement in vestibular symptoms (assessed as a dichotomous outcome - improved or not improved), 2) change in vestibular symptoms (assessed as a continuous outcome, with a score on a numerical scale) and 3) serious adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were: 4) disease-specific health-related quality of life, 5) generic health-related quality of life and 6) other adverse effects. We considered outcomes reported at three time points: 3 to < 6 months, 6 to ≤ 12 months and > 12 months. We planned to use GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: Few randomised controlled trials have been conducted to assess the efficacy of different treatments for PPPD compared to no treatment (or placebo). Of the few studies we identified, only one followed up participants for at least three months, therefore most were not eligible for inclusion in this review. We identified one study from South Korea that compared the use of transcranial direct current stimulation to a sham procedure in 24 people with PPPD. This is a technique that involves electrical stimulation of the brain with a weak current, through electrodes that are placed onto the scalp. This study provided some information on the occurrence of adverse effects, and also on disease-specific quality of life at three months of follow-up. The other outcomes of interest in this review were not assessed. As this is a single, small study we cannot draw any meaningful conclusions from the numeric results. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Further work is necessary to determine whether any non-pharmacological interventions may be effective for the treatment of PPPD and to assess whether they are associated with any potential harms. As this is a chronic disease, future trials should follow up participants for a sufficient period of time to assess whether there is a persisting impact on the severity of the disease, rather than only observing short-term effects.

Objectives: This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (intervention). The objectives are as follows:. To assess the benefits and harms of positive pressure therapy for Ménière's disease.

Loss of olfactory function is well recognised as a symptom of COVID-19 infection, and the pandemic has resulted in a large number of individuals with abnormalities in their sense of smell. For many, the condition is temporary and resolves within two to four weeks. However, in a significant minority the symptoms persist. At present, it is not known whether early intervention with any form of treatment (such as medication or olfactory training) can promote recovery and prevent persisting olfactory disturbance. This is an update of the 2021 review with four studies added.1) To evaluate the benefits and harms of any intervention versus no treatment for people with acute olfactory dysfunction due to COVID-19 infection. 2) To keep the evidence up-to-date, using a living systematic review approach. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the latest search was 20 October 2021.We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in people with COVID-19 related olfactory disturbance, which had been present for less than four weeks. We included any intervention compared to no treatment or placebo. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were the presence of normal olfactory function, serious adverse effects and change in sense of smell. Secondary outcomes were the prevalence of parosmia, change in sense of taste, disease-related quality of life and other adverse effects (including nosebleeds/bloody discharge). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We included five studies with 691 participants. The studies evaluated the following interventions: intranasal corticosteroid sprays, intranasal corticosteroid drops, intranasal hypertonic saline and zinc sulphate. Intranasal corticosteroid spray compared to no intervention/placebo We included three studies with 288 participants who had olfactory dysfunction for less than four weeks following COVID-19. Presence of normal olfactory function The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of intranasal corticosteroid spray on both self-rated recovery of olfactory function and recovery of olfactory function using psychophysical tests at up to four weeks follow-up (self-rated: risk ratio (RR) 1.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85 to 1.68; 1 study; 100 participants; psychophysical testing: RR 2.3, 95% CI 1.16 to 4.63; 1 study; 77 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Change in sense of smell The evidence is also very uncertain about the effect of intranasal corticosteroid spray on self-rated change in the sense of smell (at less than 4 weeks: mean difference (MD) 0.5 points lower, 95% CI 1.38 lower to 0.38 higher; 1 study; 77 participants; at4 weeks to 3 months: MD 2.4 points higher, 95% CI 1.32 higher to 3.48 higher; 1 study; 100 participants; very low-certainty evidence, rated on a scale of 1 to 10, higher scores mean better olfactory function). Intranasal corticosteroids may make little or no difference to the change in sense of smell when assessed with psychophysical testing (MD 0.2 points, 95% CI 2.06 points lower to 2.06 points higher; 1 study; 77 participants; low-certainty evidence, 0- to 24-point scale, higher scores mean better olfactory function). Serious adverse effects The authors of one study reported no adverse effects, but their intention to collect these data was not pre-specified so we are uncertain if these were systematically sought and identified. The remaining two studies did not report on adverse effects. Intranasal corticosteroid drops compared to no intervention/placebo We included one study with 248 participants who had olfactory dysfunction for ≤ 15 days following COVID-19. Presence of normal olfactory function Intranasal corticosteroid drops may make little or no difference to self-rated recovery at4 weeks to 3 months (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.11; 1 study; 248 participants; low-certainty evidence). No other outcomes were assessed by this study. Data on the use of hypertonic saline nasal irrigation and the use of zinc sulphate to prevent persistent olfactory dysfunction are included in the full text of the review.There is very limited evidence available on the efficacy and harms of treatments for preventing persistent olfactory dysfunction following COVID-19 infection. However, we have identified a number of ongoing trials in this area. As this is a living systematic review we will update the data regularly, as new results become available.

Objectives/hypothesis This study set out to describe the progression of hearing loss in patients with neurofibromatosis type 2 (NF2), treated in a quaternary multidisciplinary clinic. It also aimed to compare hearing loss across patients grouped according to a known genetic severity score to explore its utility for prognostication. Study design Retrospective cohort study. Methods We conducted a study of 147 patients with confirmed NF2 diagnosis for a mean observational period of 10 years. Pure-tone average (PTA), optimum discriminations scores (ODS), and genotype data were collected. Patients were classified according to hearing class (American Academy of Otolaryngology), their candidacy for auditory implantation (UK National NF2 consensus) and grouped by genetic severity as: 1 = tissue mosaic, 2A = mild classic, 2B = moderate classic, and 3 = severe. Survival analysis investigated the effect of genetic severity on the age of loss of serviceable hearing. Results Genetic severity was a significant predictor of hearing outcomes such as ODS, hearing classification, and maximum annual PTA deterioration. Although the overall median age of loss of serviceable hearing was 78 years, there was significant variation according to the genetic severity; the median for severe patients was 32 years compared to a median of 80 for tissue mosaic patients. Conclusions This is the first description of long-term hearing outcomes in a clinical setting across a large heterogeneous cohort of patients with NF2. The results highlight the potential importance and benefit of considering the genetic severity score of patients when undertaking treatment decisions, as well as planning future natural history studies. Level of evidence 2c Laryngoscope, 129:974-980, 2019.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS To determine if aspirin intake is associated with reduced growth of vestibular schwannomas (VS). To determine the prevalence of contraindications to regular aspirin in patients with VS. STUDY DESIGN Retrospective, observational case-control study. METHODS The study utilized a postal questionnaire and telephone interviews to determine aspirin exposure. Propensity score matching was used to control for age, sex, and tumor size. Cases were defined as patients with VS proven to have grown on serial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Controls were defined as patient with VS stable on serial MRI. Prevalence of regular aspirin use was compared in patients with growing VS versus stable VS. Absolute and relative contraindications to aspirin intake were recorded. RESULTS Six hundred fifty-three patients with VS were contacted, and responses were received by 67% (220 cases and 217 controls). The mean tumor size was 11.3 mm (9.0 mm and 13.3 mm in controls and cases, respectively). Aspirin exposure was more common in stable VS than growing VS (22.1% vs. 17.3%). However, following matching to control for covariates, aspirin was not found to be associated with VS stability (P = .475). Multiple logistic regression (analysis of variance) found tumor size to be the only factor strongly associated with tumor growth (P

Objective: Previous studies of CT and MRI before cochlear implantation have been of limited sample size, lacked statistical analysis, and been inconsistent in their conclusions. We aim to quantify the utility of CT, MRI, and their combination in order to rationalize their selection.Method: Clinical records and radiological findings were correlated retrospectively in 158 adults and children. All underwent both CT and MRI.Results: A total of 27.9% (95% CI: 21.0 - 35.5) of patients had a significant radiological abnormality, but these were considered critical to subsequent management in only 12.7% (7.9 - 18.9). All of these were detected by MRI. They were missed by CT in 6.3% (3.1 - 11.3). A total of 6.3% also had noncritical abnormalities that were reported only on CT. Cochlear dysmorphisms were more common in children, but the overall frequency of abnormalities and their detection rates did not depend on age. Omitting CT and using MRI alone is estimated to miss no critical abnormalities (95% CI: 0 - 2.3%)....

Objective: Oncological surgical technological innovation has produced alternative hemostatic dissection techniques. Collateral tissue destruction and impact upon assessment of tumor resection margins from Harmonic and Coblation dissectors remains unknown. This study uses an ex-vivo animal model to quantify the collateral tissue destruction caused by the harmonic scalpel vs coblator wand dissection.Method: Incisions through cow tongue were made between defined parallel lines with each dissection technique. The residual tissue width was measured with vernier calipers and subtracted from the width of original tissue. A scalpel blade was used as a control.Results: The mean width of collateral tissue destruction for each modality was as follows: harmonic cutting 3.0 mm, harmonic coagulating 4.1 mm, coblation cutting 3.5 mm, harmonic cutting under tissue tension 1.2 mm.Conclusion: This study demonstrates that tissue destruction produced when using the harmonic scalpel and coblation is significant when compared ...

Postlaryngectomy tracheostomal stenosis is a common complication. Stomal narrowing can be severe, requiring urgent management with dilatation of the stoma. There are numerous ways to achieve this, ranging from forcibly inserting a larger tracheostomy tube, using a graduated dilator, to surgical intervention in the form of a stomaplasty. We describe an alternative technique using a readily available cuffed tracheostomy tube.