Search

Chaihu-jia-Longgu-Muli decoction (CLMD) has been proven clinically effective in treating vertigo with anxiety disorder. However, the mechanism is not clear. This study aimed to explore the mechanism of CLMD in treating vertigo with anxiety disorder based on ultra-performance liquid chromatography-quadrupole time-of-flight/mass spectrometry (UPLC-Q-TOF/MS) and network pharmacology. UPLC-Q-TOF/MS was performed to identify the compounds in blood and the targets of compounds of CLMD in vertigo and anxiety were searched using databases. A protein-protein interaction network was built to screen the core targets. The core targets were analyzed by Gene Ontology (GO) and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) pathway analyses. In addition, the vertigo with anxiety rat model was used to verify the results. A total of 22 compounds were absorbed into the blood. Eighty-one potential targets associated with CLMD for vertigo with anxiety disorder were identified through network pharmacological analysis. Subsequently, GO and KEGG analysis showed that CLMD treatment for vertigo with anxiety disorder is associated with neurotransmitter levels and other pertinent physiological processes. The results of the animal experiments showed that CLMD decreased the levels of serotonin, norepinephrine and dopamine, alleviating the symptoms of vertigo and anxiety disorder in model rats. The study revealed CLMD could alleviate vertigo and anxiety symptoms through reducing the levels of neurotransmitters., (© 2024 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Vestibular migraine is a form of migraine where one of the main features is recurrent attacks of vertigo. These episodes are often associated with other features of migraine, including headache and sensitivity to light or sound. The unpredictable and severe attacks of vertigo can lead to a considerable reduction in quality of life. The condition is estimated to affect just under 1% of the population, although many people remain undiagnosed. A number of pharmacological interventions have been used, or proposed to be used, at the time of a vestibular migraine attack to help reduce the severity or resolve the symptoms. These are predominantly based on treatments that are in use for headache migraine, with the belief that the underlying pathophysiology of these conditions is similar.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of pharmacological interventions used to relieve acute attacks of vestibular migraine., 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 23 September 2022., Selection Criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs in adults with definite or probable vestibular migraine comparing triptans, ergot alkaloids, dopamine antagonists, antihistamines, 5-HT3 receptor antagonists, gepants (CGRP receptor antagonists), magnesium, paracetamol or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) with either placebo or no treatment.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were: 1) improvement in vertigo (assessed as a dichotomous outcome - improved or not improved), 2) change in vertigo (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) improvement in headache, 6) improvement in other migrainous symptoms and 7) other adverse effects. We considered outcomes reported at three time points: < 2 hours, 2 to 12 hours, > 12 to 72 hours. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome.  MAIN RESULTS: We included two RCTs with a total of 133 participants, both of which compared the use of triptans to placebo for an acute attack of vestibular migraine. One study was a parallel-group RCT (of 114 participants, 75% female). This compared the use of 10 mg rizatriptan to placebo. The second study was a smaller, cross-over RCT (of 19 participants, 70% female). This compared the use of 2.5 mg zolmitriptan to placebo.  Triptans may result in little or no difference in the proportion of people whose vertigo improves at up to two hours after taking the medication. However, the evidence was very uncertain (risk ratio 0.84, 95% confidence interval 0.66 to 1.07; 2 studies; based on 262 attacks of vestibular migraine treated in 124 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We did not identify any evidence on the change in vertigo using a continuous scale. Only one of the studies assessed serious adverse events. No events were noted in either group, but as the sample size was small we cannot be sure if there are risks associated with taking triptans for this condition (0/75 receiving triptans, 0/39 receiving placebo; 1 study; 114 participants; very low-certainty evidence).  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence for interventions used to treat acute attacks of vestibular migraine is very sparse. We identified only two studies, both of which assessed the use of triptans. We rated all the evidence as very low-certainty, meaning that we have little confidence in the effect estimates and cannot be sure if triptans have any effect on the symptoms of vestibular migraine. Although we identified sparse information on potential harms of treatment in this review, the use of triptans for other conditions (such as headache migraine) is known to be associated with some adverse effects.  We did not identify any placebo-controlled randomised trials for other interventions that may be used for this condition. Further research is needed to identify whether any interventions help to improve the symptoms of vestibular migraine attacks and to determine if there are side effects associated with their use., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. on behalf of The Cochrane Collaboration.)

Background: Ménière's disease is a condition that causes recurrent episodes of vertigo, associated with hearing loss and tinnitus. Corticosteroids are sometimes administered directly into the middle ear to treat this condition (through the tympanic membrane). The underlying cause of Ménière's disease is unknown, as is the way in which this treatment may work. The efficacy of this intervention in preventing vertigo attacks, and their associated symptoms, is currently unclear., Objectives: To evaluate the benefits and harms of intratympanic corticosteroids versus placebo or no treatment in people with Ménière's disease., 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 14 September 2022., Selection Criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs in adults with a diagnosis of Ménière's disease comparing intratympanic corticosteroids with either placebo or no treatment. We excluded studies with follow-up of less than three months, or with a cross-over design (unless data from the first phase of the study could be identified).  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were: 1) improvement in vertigo (assessed as a dichotomous outcome - improved or not improved), 2) change in vertigo (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) change in hearing, 6) change in tinnitus and 7) other adverse effects (including tympanic membrane perforation). We considered outcomes reported at three time points: 3 to < 6 months, 6 to ≤ 12 months and > 12 months. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome.  MAIN RESULTS: We included 10 studies with a total of 952 participants. All studies used the corticosteroid dexamethasone, with doses ranging from approximately 2 mg to 12 mg.  Improvement in vertigo Intratympanic corticosteroids may make little or no difference to the number of people who report an improvement in their vertigo at 6 to ≤ 12 months follow-up (intratympanic corticosteroids 96.8%, placebo 96.6%, risk ratio (RR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92 to 1.10; 2 studies; 60 participants; low-certainty evidence) or at more than 12 months follow-up (intratympanic corticosteroids 100%, placebo 96.3%; RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.23; 2 studies; 58 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, we note the large improvement in the placebo group for these trials, which causes challenges in interpreting these results.  Change in vertigo Assessed with a global score One study (44 participants) assessed the change in vertigo at 3 to < 6 months using a global score, which considered the frequency, duration and severity of vertigo. This is a single, small study and the certainty of the evidence was very low. We are unable to draw meaningful conclusions from the numerical results. Assessed by frequency of vertigo Three studies (304 participants) assessed the change in frequency of vertigo episodes at 3 to < 6 months. Intratympanic corticosteroids may slightly reduce the frequency of vertigo episodes. The proportion of days affected by vertigo was 0.05 lower (absolute difference -5%) in those receiving intratympanic corticosteroids (95% CI -0.07 to -0.02; 3 studies; 472 participants; low-certainty evidence). This is equivalent to a difference of approximately 1.5 days fewer per month affected by vertigo in the corticosteroid group (with the control group having vertigo on approximately 2.5 to 3.5 days per month at the end of follow-up, and those receiving corticosteroids having vertigo on approximately 1 to 2 days per month). However, this result should be interpreted with caution - we are aware of unpublished data at this time point in which corticosteroids failed to show a benefit over placebo. One study also assessed the change in frequency of vertigo at 6 to ≤ 12 months and > 12 months follow-up. However, this is a single, small study and the certainty of the evidence was very low. Therefore, we are unable to draw meaningful conclusions from the numerical results. Serious adverse events Four studies reported this outcome. There may be little or no effect on the occurrence of serious adverse events with intratympanic corticosteroids, but the evidence is very uncertain (intratympanic corticosteroids 3.0%, placebo 4.4%; RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.85; 4 studies; 500 participants; very low-certainty evidence)., Authors' Conclusions: The evidence for intratympanic corticosteroids in the treatment of Ménière's disease is uncertain. There are relatively few published RCTs, which all consider the same type of corticosteroid (dexamethasone). We also have concerns about publication bias in this area, with the identification of two large RCTs that remain unpublished. The evidence comparing intratympanic corticosteroids to placebo or no treatment is therefore all low- or very low-certainty. This means that we have very low confidence that the effects reported are accurate estimates of the true effect of these interventions. Consensus on the appropriate outcomes to measure in studies of Ménière's disease is needed (i.e. a core outcome set) in order to guide future studies in this area, and enable meta-analysis of the results. This must include appropriate consideration of the potential harms of treatment, as well as the benefits. Finally, we would also highlight the responsibility that trialists have to ensure results are available, regardless of the outcome of their study., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. on behalf of The Cochrane Collaboration.)

Background: Ménière's disease is a condition that causes recurrent episodes of vertigo, associated with hearing loss and tinnitus. Aminoglycosides are sometimes administered directly into the middle ear to treat this condition. The aim of this treatment is to partially or completely destroy the balance function of the affected ear. The efficacy of this intervention in preventing vertigo attacks, and their associated symptoms, is currently unclear., Objectives: To evaluate the benefits and harms of intratympanic aminoglycosides versus placebo or no treatment in people with Ménière's disease., 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 14 September 2022., Selection Criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs in adults with a diagnosis of Ménière's disease comparing intratympanic aminoglycosides with either placebo or no treatment. We excluded studies with follow-up of less than three months, or with a cross-over design (unless data from the first phase of the study could be identified).  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were: 1) improvement in vertigo (assessed as a dichotomous outcome - improved or not improved), 2) change in vertigo (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) change in hearing, 6) change in tinnitus and 7) other adverse effects. We considered outcomes reported at three time points: 3 to < 6 months, 6 to ≤ 12 months and > 12 months. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome.  MAIN RESULTS: We included five RCTs with a total of 137 participants. All studies compared the use of gentamicin to either placebo or no treatment. Due to the very small numbers of participants in these trials, and concerns over the conduct and reporting of some studies, we considered all the evidence in this review to be very low-certainty.  Improvement in vertigo This outcome was assessed by only two studies, and they used different time periods for reporting. Improvement in vertigo was reported by more participants who received gentamicin at both 6 to ≤ 12 months (16/16 participants who received gentamicin, compared to 0/16 participants with no intervention; risk ratio (RR) 33.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.15 to 507; 1 study; 32 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and at > 12 months follow-up (12/12 participants receiving gentamicin, compared to 6/10 participants receiving placebo; RR 1.63, 95% CI 0.98 to 2.69; 1 study; 22 participants; very low-certainty evidence). However, we were unable to conduct any meta-analysis for this outcome, the certainty of the evidence was very low and we cannot draw any meaningful conclusions from the results.  Change in vertigo Again, two studies assessed this outcome, but used different methods of measuring vertigo and assessed the outcome at different time points. We were therefore unable to carry out any meta-analysis or draw any meaningful conclusions from the results. Global scores of vertigo were lower for those who received gentamicin at both 6 to ≤ 12 months (mean difference (MD) -1 point, 95% CI -1.68 to -0.32; 1 study; 26 participants; very low-certainty evidence; four-point scale; minimally clinically important difference presumed to be one point) and at > 12 months (MD -1.8 points, 95% CI -2.49 to -1.11; 1 study; 26 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Vertigo frequency was also lower at > 12 months for those who received gentamicin (0 attacks per year in participants receiving gentamicin compared to 11 attacks per year for those receiving placebo; 1 study; 22 participants; very low-certainty evidence).  Serious adverse events None of the included studies provided information on the total number of participants who experienced a serious adverse event. It is unclear whether this is because no adverse events occurred, or because they were not assessed or reported.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence for the use of intratympanic gentamicin in the treatment of Ménière's disease is very uncertain. This is primarily due to the fact that there are few published RCTs in this area, and all the studies we identified enrolled a very small number of participants. As the studies assessed different outcomes, using different methods, and reported at different time points, we were not able to pool the results to obtain more reliable estimates of the efficacy of this treatment. More people may report an improvement in vertigo following gentamicin treatment, and scores of vertigo symptoms may also improve. However, the limitations of the evidence mean that we cannot be sure of these effects. Although there is the potential for intratympanic gentamicin to cause harm (for example, hearing loss) we did not find any information about the risks of treatment in this review.  Consensus on the appropriate outcomes to measure in studies of Ménière's disease is needed (i.e. a core outcome set) in order to guide future studies in this area and enable meta-analysis of the results. This must include appropriate consideration of the potential harms of treatment, as well as the benefits., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. on behalf of The Cochrane Collaboration.)

Background: Idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSNHL) is common, and defined as a sudden decrease in sensorineural hearing sensitivity of unknown aetiology. Systemic corticosteroids are widely used, however their value remains unclear. Intratympanic injections of corticosteroids have become increasingly common in the treatment of ISSNHL., Objectives: To assess the effects of intratympanic corticosteroids in people with ISSNHL., Search Methods: The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Trials Register; CENTRAL (2021, Issue 9); PubMed; Ovid Embase; CINAHL; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials (search date 23 September 2021)., Selection Criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving people with ISSNHL and follow-up of over a week. Intratympanic corticosteroids were given as primary or secondary treatment (after failure of systemic therapy)., Data Collection and Analysis: We used standard Cochrane methods, including GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. Our primary outcome was change in hearing threshold with pure tone audiometry. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of people whose hearing improved, final hearing threshold, speech audiometry, frequency-specific hearing changes and adverse effects., Main Results: We included 30 studies, comprising 2133 analysed participants. Some studies had more than two treatment arms and were therefore relevant to several comparisons. Studies investigated intratympanic corticosteroids as either primary (initial) therapy or secondary (rescue) therapy after failure of initial treatment. 1. Intratympanic corticosteroids versus systemic corticosteroids as primary therapy We identified 16 studies (1108 participants). Intratympanic therapy may result in little to no improvement in the change in hearing threshold (mean difference (MD) -5.93 dB better, 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.61 to -4.26; 10 studies; 701 participants; low-certainty). We found little to no difference in the proportion of participants whose hearing was improved (risk ratio (RR) 1.04, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.12; 14 studies; 972 participants; moderate-certainty). Intratympanic therapy may result in little to no difference in the final hearing threshold (MD -3.31 dB, 95% CI -6.16 to -0.47; 7 studies; 516 participants; low-certainty). Intratympanic therapy may increase the number of people who experience vertigo or dizziness (RR 2.53, 95% CI 1.41 to 4.54; 1 study; 250 participants; low-certainty) and probably increases the number of people with ear pain (RR 15.68, 95% CI 6.22 to 39.49; 2 studies; 289 participants; moderate-certainty). It also resulted in persistent tympanic membrane perforation (range 0% to 3.9%; 3 studies; 359 participants; very low-certainty), vertigo/dizziness at the time of injection (1% to 21%, 3 studies; 197 participants; very low-certainty) and ear pain at the time of injection (10.5% to 27.1%; 2 studies; 289 participants; low-certainty). 2. Intratympanic plus systemic corticosteroids (combined therapy) versus systemic corticosteroids alone as primary therapy We identified 10 studies (788 participants). Combined therapy may have a small effect on the change in hearing threshold (MD -8.55 dB better, 95% CI -12.48 to -4.61; 6 studies; 435 participants; low-certainty). The evidence is very uncertain as to whether combined therapy changes the proportion of participants whose hearing is improved (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.41; 10 studies; 788 participants; very low-certainty). Combined therapy may result in slightly lower (more favourable) final hearing thresholds but the evidence is very uncertain, and it is not clear whether the change would be important to patients (MD -9.11 dB, 95% CI -16.56 to -1.67; 3 studies; 194 participants; very low-certainty). Some adverse effects only occurred in those who received combined therapy. These included persistent tympanic membrane perforation (range 0% to 5.5%; 5 studies; 474 participants; very low-certainty), vertigo or dizziness at the time of injection (range 0% to 8.1%; 4 studies; 341 participants; very low-certainty) and ear pain at the time of injection (13.5%; 1 study; 73 participants; very low-certainty).  3. Intratympanic corticosteroids versus no treatment or placebo as secondary therapy We identified seven studies (279 participants). Intratympanic therapy may have a small effect on the change in hearing threshold (MD -9.07 dB better, 95% CI -11.47 to -6.66; 7 studies; 280 participants; low-certainty). Intratympanic therapy may result in a much higher proportion of participants whose hearing is improved (RR 5.55, 95% CI 2.89 to 10.68; 6 studies; 232 participants; low-certainty). Intratympanic therapy may result in lower (more favourable) final hearing thresholds (MD -11.09 dB, 95% CI -17.46 to -4.72; 5 studies; 203 participants; low-certainty). Some adverse effects only occurred in those who received intratympanic injection. These included persistent tympanic membrane perforation (range 0% to 4.2%; 5 studies; 185 participants; very low-certainty), vertigo or dizziness at the time of injection (range 6.7% to 33%; 3 studies; 128 participants; very low-certainty) and ear pain at the time of injection (0%; 1 study; 44 participants; very low-certainty).  4. Intratympanic plus systemic corticosteroids (combined therapy) versus systemic corticosteroids alone as secondary therapy We identified one study with 76 participants. Change in hearing threshold was not reported. Combined therapy may result in a higher proportion with hearing improvement, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 2.24, 95% CI 1.10 to 4.55; very low-certainty). Adverse effects were poorly reported with only data for persistent tympanic membrane perforation (rate 8.1%, very low-certainty)., Authors' Conclusions: Most of the evidence in this review is low- or very low-certainty, therefore it is likely that further studies may change our conclusions.   For primary therapy, intratympanic corticosteroids may have little or no effect compared with systemic corticosteroids. There may be a slight benefit from combined treatment when compared with systemic treatment alone, but the evidence is uncertain. For secondary therapy, there is low-certainty evidence that intratympanic corticosteroids, when compared to no treatment or placebo, may result in a much higher proportion of participants whose hearing is improved, but may only have a small effect on the change in hearing threshold. It is very uncertain whether there is additional benefit from combined treatment over systemic steroids alone. Although adverse effects were poorly reported, the different risk profiles of intratympanic treatment (including tympanic membrane perforation, pain and dizziness/vertigo) and systemic treatment (for example, blood glucose problems) should be considered when selecting appropriate treatment., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. on behalf of The Cochrane Collaboration.)

Background: Vertigo is a symptom in which individuals experience a false sensation of movement. This type of dizziness is thought to originate in the inner ear labyrinth or its neural connections. It is a commonly experienced symptom and can cause significant problems with carrying out normal activities. Betahistine is a drug that may work by improving blood flow to the inner ear. This review examines whether betahistine is more effective than a placebo at treating symptoms of vertigo from different causes., Objectives: To assess the effects of betahistine in patients with symptoms of vertigo from different causes., Search Methods: The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Trials Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2015, Issue 8); PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. We also contacted manufacturers and researchers in the field. The date of the search was 21 September 2015., Selection Criteria: We included randomised controlled trials of betahistine versus placebo in patients of any age with vertigo from any neurotological diagnosis in any settings., Data Collection and Analysis: We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcome was the proportion of patients with reduction in vertigo symptoms (considering together the intensity, frequency and duration those symptoms)., Main Results: We included 17 studies, with a total of 1025 participants; 12 studies were published (567 patients) and five were unpublished (458 patients). Sixteen studies including 953 people compared betahistine with placebo. All studies with analysable data lasted three months or less. The majority were at high risk of bias, but in some the risk of bias was unclear. One study, at high risk of bias, included 72 people with benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV) and compared betahistine with placebo; all patients also had particle repositioning manoeuvres. The studies varied considerably in terms of types of participants, their diagnoses, the dose of betahistine and the length of time it was taken for, the study methods and the way any improvement in vertigo symptoms was measured. Using the GRADE system, we judged the quality of evidence overall to be low for two outcomes (proportion of patients with improvement and proportion with adverse events).Pooled data showed that the proportion of patients reporting an overall reduction in their vertigo symptoms was higher in the group treated with betahistine than the placebo group: risk ratio (RR) 1.30, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05 to 1.60; 606 participants; 11 studies). This result should be interpreted with caution as the test for statistical heterogeneity as measured by the I(2) value was high.Adverse effects (mostly gastrointestinal symptoms and headache) were common but medically serious events in the study were rare and isolated: there was no difference in the frequency of adverse effects between the betahistine and placebo groups, where the rates were 16% and 15% respectively (weighted values, RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.40; 819 participants; 12 studies).Sixteen per cent of patients from both the betahistine and the placebo groups withdrew (dropped out) from the studies (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.42; 481 participants; eight studies).Three studies looked at objective vestibular function tests as an outcome; the numbers of participants were small, techniques of measurement very diverse and reporting details sparse, so analysis of this outcome was inconclusive.We looked for information on generic quality of life and falls, but none of the studies reported on these outcomes., Authors' Conclusions: Low quality evidence suggests that in patients suffering from vertigo from different causes there may be a positive effect of betahistine in terms of reduction in vertigo symptoms. Betahistine is generally well tolerated with a low risk of adverse events. Future research into the management of vertigo symptoms needs to use more rigorous methodology and include outcomes that matter to patients and their families.

Background: Ménière's disease is a disorder characterised by hearing loss, tinnitus and disabling vertigo. The use of intratympanic steroids to reduce the severity of these symptoms has been gaining popularity., Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of intratympanic steroids on the frequency and severity of attacks of vertigo, on chronic symptoms such as tinnitus, imbalance and hearing loss, and on the progression of these symptoms in patients with definite Ménière's disease or syndrome, as defined by the AAO-HNS Committee., Search Strategy: We searched the Cochrane Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders Group Trials Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; BIOSIS Previews; Cambridge Scientific Abstracts; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the most recent search was 13 January 2011., Selection Criteria: Randomised controlled trials of intratympanic dexamethasone versus placebo in patients with Ménière's disease., Data Collection and Analysis: Two authors independently assessed trial risk of bias and extracted data. We contacted study authors for further information where possible., Main Results: A single trial containing 22 patients, with a low risk of bias was included. This trial found that after 24 months, compared with placebo, the use of intratympanic dexamethasone demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in vertigo as defined by a respective improvement in functional level (90% versus 42%), class (82% versus 57%), change in Dizziness Handicap Inventory scores (60.4 versus 41.3) and mean vertigo subjective improvement (90% versus 57%). The treatment regime described by the authors involved daily injections of dexamethasone solution 4 mg/ml for five consecutive days. These results were clinically significant. No complications were reported., Authors' Conclusions: The results of a single trial provide limited evidence to support the effectiveness of intratympanic steroids in patients with Ménière's disease. This trial demonstrated a statistically and clinically significant improvement of the frequency and severity of vertigo measured 24 months after the treatment was administered. It is important to note that there were a few aspects of the study which we were unable to clarify with the study authors.

Background: Ménière's disease is characterised by three major symptoms: vertigo, deafness and tinnitus, which may be accompanied by aural fullness, all of which are discontinuous and variable in intensity. While discontinuous, these symptoms are synchronous. Intratympanic application of gentamicin, an ototoxic aminoglycoside, is a relatively new ablative treatment for vertigo in Ménière's disease with promising results., Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of intratympanic gentamicin in the treatment of vertigo in Ménière's disease., Search Strategy: We searched the Cochrane Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders Group Trials Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; BIOSIS Previews; Cambridge Scientific Abstracts; ISRCTN and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the most recent search was 30 June 2010., Selection Criteria: All randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials of intratympanic gentamicin versus placebo, or versus another treatment for Ménière's disease., Data Collection and Analysis: Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We contacted study authors for further information., Main Results: We identified two trials, involving 50 participants, which fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Both of these trials are prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised clinical trials on the effect of intratympanic gentamicin on vertigo complaints. Both of these trials found a significant reduction in vertigo complaints in the gentamicin group when compared to the placebo group. Due to clinical heterogeneity we could not perform a meta-analysis., Authors' Conclusions: Based on the results of the two included studies, intratympanic gentamicin seems to be an effective treatment for vertigo complaints in Ménière's disease, but carries a risk of hearing loss.

Objective: To assess the efficacy of topiramate in reducing both the frequency and the severity of vertigo and headache attacks in patients with migrainous vertigo and to compare 50 and 100 mg/day doses of the drug., Methods: Thirty patients diagnosed as definite migrainous vertigo were recruited in the study. Vertigo and headache frequency was determined as the monthly number of attacks whereas severity was determined by visual analog scales measured in millimeters from 0 to 100. Patients were randomized to either 50 or 100 mg/day topiramate for 6 months. Vertigo and headache frequency and severity were evaluated at the end of the study period., Results: Number of mothly vertigo attacks decreased significantly in the overall group after treatment (median from 5.5 to 1; P < .01). The same was true for monthly headache attacks (median from 4 to 1; P < .01). A statically significant improvement in vertigo severity was noted (median from 80 to 20 mm; P < .01). Headache severity showed significant improvement as well (median from 60 to 30 mm; P < .01). No statistically significant difference between high- and low-dose groups was present regarding efficacy (P > .05). Four patients in the high-dose group discontinued treatment at the end of the first month because of adverse effects., Conclusions: In the overall group, topiramate was found to be effective in reducing the frequency and the severity of vertigo and headache attacks. Both doses of the drug were equally efficacious. The 50 mg/day dose seems to be appropriate as higher adverse effects were noted when 100 mg/day was used.

Objectives: The most common vestibular disorders seen in the emergency department (ED) are benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV) and acute peripheral vestibulopathy (APV; i.e., vestibular neuritis or labyrinthitis). BPPV and APV are two very distinct disorders that have different clinical presentations that require different diagnostic and treatment strategies. BPPV can be diagnosed without imaging and is treated with canalith-repositioning maneuvers. APV sometimes requires neuroimaging by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to exclude posterior fossa stroke mimics and should be treated with vestibular sedatives and corticosteroids. We sought to determine if emergency physicians (EPs) apply best practices to diagnose and treat these common vestibular disorders., Methods: This was a cross-sectional study of ED visits from the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS). A weighted sample of U.S. ED visits (1993-2005) was used. Patients at least 16 years of age who were given a final ED diagnosis of BPPV (International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision [ICD-9], 386.11) or APV (ICD-9 386.12 or 386.3x) comprised the study population. The frequency of imaging and drug therapy in those diagnosed as BPPV or APV versus controls was the main outcome measure., Results: A total of 9,472 dizzy patient visits were sampled over 13 years (weighted estimate 33.6 million U.S. ED visits over that period). A weighted estimate of 2.5 million patients (7.4%) were given a vestibular diagnosis, mostly BPPV (weighted 0.2 million) or APV (weighted 1.9 million). Patients given BPPV (19%) and APV (19%) diagnoses were more likely to undergo imaging (all by computed tomography [CT]) than controls (7%; p < 0.001). Patients given BPPV (58%) and APV (70%) diagnoses were more likely to receive meclizine than controls (0.1%; p < 0.001). Corticosteroid administration was rarely documented (2% BPPV, 1% APV)., Conclusions: Patients given a vestibular diagnosis in the ED may not be managed optimally. Patients given BPPV and APV diagnoses undergo imaging (predominantly CT) with equal frequency, suggesting overuse of CT (BPPV) and probably underuse of MRI (APV). Most patients diagnosed with BPPV are given meclizine, which is not indicated. Specific therapy for APV (corticosteroids) is probably underutilized. Educational initiatives and clinical guidelines merit consideration.

Migrainous vertigo (MV) is a newer evolving concept in which vertigo is causally related to migraine. We report 4 patients with MV. Episodes of severe MV of more than 1-day duration were successfully terminated by intravenous methylprednisolone (IV MPS) in 2 patients. Two other patients who had attacks of MV almost daily also showed complete response to IV MPS.

Objective: To conduct a clinical trial of famciclovir for symptom control in Meniere's disease., Study Design and Setting: Randomized, double-blinded placebo-controlled clinical trial in a tertiary referral center, with 12 subjects in the active treatment arm and 11 subjects in the placebo arm., Results: There were no serious adverse events. Twenty-five percent of the famciclovir group and 18% of the placebo group showed a reduction in number of vertigo spells, the primary efficacy endpoint. This difference was not statistically significant. All subjects improved in dizziness and health-related quality of life. There was a trend for the famciclovir arm to have less fluctuation in hearing relative to the placebo arm., Conclusion: No dramatic effects of famciclovir were found on vertigo or dizziness. Some promising effects on reduction of the fluctuation in hearing were observed., Significance: Famciclovir may suppress the fluctuation of hearing in Meniere's disease, but had a minimal effect on vertigo or dizziness symptoms in this study. The probable multifactorial etiology in Meniere's disease requires that further studies be conducted to determine the effects of antiviral medications., Ebm Rating: A.

Objective: The emergency department (ED) treatment of acute peripheral vertigo (APV) has not been well studied. The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy of intramuscular (IM) droperidol vs IM dimenhydrinate, in the treatment of ED patients with APV., Methods: The study was a randomized, double-blinded clinical trial, performed at a suburban, teaching ED. A convenience sample of adult patients with symptoms and signs consistent with rigid diagnostic criteria for APV were randomized to one of two treatment groups. Patients more than 65 years of age were excluded to reduce the likelihood of diagnostic misclassification. Demographic and historical features were recorded on a standardized data form. Patients recorded their initial level (t0) of discomfort on a 10-centimeter (cm) visual analog scale (VAS). Treatment group 1 received 2.5 mg droperidol IM, while treatment group 2 received 50 mg dimenhydrinate IM. After 30 minutes (t30), patients again recorded the severity of their symptoms on the VAS. Chi-square, t-tests, and Mann-Whitney were used for statistical comparison as appropriate. All tests were two-tailed, with alpha set at 0.05. Primary outcome parameters were the mean change in VAS score from t0 to t30, and the percentage of patients in each treatment group who felt well enough to go home after t30 without further ED intervention., Results: There were 20 patients in the droperidol group and 20 in the dimenhydrinate group. The two groups were similar with respect to mean age (40 +/- 13 years droperidol vs. 42 +/- 13 years dimenhydrinate; p = 0.6), female sex (60% vs. 50%; p = 0.7), and mean median duration of symptoms [3 (interquartile range 2-12) vs 9 (interquartile range 2-30) hours; p = 0.2]. Mean initial t0 VAS scores were 7.2 +/- 2.3 and 7.8 +/- 1.9 (p = 0.47). Both treatment groups had mean reductions in VAS scores at t30 of 3.3 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) = 2.3 to 4.3]. At t30, 42% of patients in the droperidol group and 45% of patients in the dimenhydrinate group felt well enough to go home without further ED intervention., Conclusions: The authors found no difference between the therapeutic efficacies of IM droperidol and dimenhydrinate for the treatment of acute peripheral vertigo.

Objectives: The study goals were to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of continuous gentamicin therapy (CGT) in the treatment of Meniere's disease and to evaluate the effect of flow rate., Study Design: In a retrospective study, physicians who were known to have used CGT in the treatment of Meniere's disease were asked to report patient information on a standardized data collection form., Results: In patients treated with low-flow CGT, vertigo was eliminated or substantially controlled in 90%, tinnitus was improved in 69%, pressure was improved in 77%, hearing was worse in 23%, and vestibular function was ablated in only 14% of patients., Conclusion: On the basis of an average 10-month follow-up period, of the methods currently available to treat Meniere's patients with gentamicin, low-flow CGT seems to provide an excellent combination of vertigo control and tinnitus and pressure improvement, with a relatively low risk to hearing and vestibular function., Significance: The clinical use of low-flow CGT appears to be justified based on these data.

Objectives: To evaluate the role of intratympanic gentamycin therapy (ITGM) in controlling vertigo in patients with refractory Meniere's who have recurrent or persistent vertigo after endolymphatic sac surgery., Study Design and Setting: A retrospective review of 491 patients seen in a university balance clinic between July 1999 and July 2000. Of these, 68 patients had Meniere's disease; 4 patients had recurrent vertigo after endolymphatic sac surgery and were followed for at least 1 year. These 4 patients received a series of ITGM injections. Outcome measures included control of vertigo and audiometric results., Results: Three of 4 (75%) patients had control of their vertigo with ITGM therapy. The 1 patient who failed ITGM therapy underwent a successful vestibular neurectomy with ultimate control of his vertigo. No patients had progression of their sensorineural hearing loss., Conclusion: ITGM therapy can be used to control vertigo in selected patients with Meniere's disease who have persistent vertigo after unsuccessful endolymphatic sac surgery., Significance: ITGM therapy may reduce the need for vestibular neurectomy in patients with refractory Meniere's disease after endolymphatic sac surgery.

Neurotologic symptoms are common with migraine, yet relatively little is known about the pathophysiology of such symptoms. Motion sensitivity with bouts of motion sickness occurs in about two thirds of patients with migraine. Episodes of vertigo occur in about one fourth of patients and, in some, vertigo is the only symptom (so-called "migraine equivalent"). Phonophobia is the most common auditory symptom, but fluctuating hearing loss and acute permanent hearing loss occur in a small percentage. Migraine can mimic Meniere's disease and so-called "vestibular Meniere's disease" is usually associated with migraine. The recent discovery of a mutation in a brain calcium-channel gene in families with hemiplegic migraine and in families with episodic vertigo and ataxia suggests a possible mechanism for neurotologic symptoms in patients with more common varieties of migraine. A defective calcium channel, primarily expressed in the brain and inner ear, could lead to reversible hair cell depolarization and auditory and vestibular symptoms. This hypothesis is currently being investigated in other families with migraine headaches and neurotologic symptoms. Hopefully, such studies will lead to improved diagnosis and better treatments in the future.

Recurrent idiopathic vertigo associated with near-syncope and syncope is a common perplexing problem, some cases of which are considered autonomically mediated (vasovagal). Upright-tilt-table testing has emerged as a potential method to test for vasovagal episodes. This study evaluated the use of this technique in the evaluation and management of patients with recurrent idiopathic vertigo associated with near-syncope or syncope. Twenty-one patients with recurrent unexplained vertigo and syncope/near-syncope and 11 control subjects were evaluated by use of an upright-tilt-table test for 30 minutes, with or without a graded isoproterenol infusion (1 to 4 micrograms/min given intravenously), in an attempt to provoke hypotension, bradycardia, or both, which reproduced the patient's symptoms. The patients included 10 men and 11 women (mean age, 51 +/- 16 years). Eleven controls with no history of vertigo were also studied. Transcranial Doppler sonography was used to assess cerebral arteriolar blood flow during tilt. All tilt-positive patients were placed on therapy with either beta-blockers, disopyramide, or transdermal scopolamine, the effectiveness of which was determined with another tilt-table study. Symptoms occurred in seven patients (33%) during the baseline tilt and in eight patients (38%) during isoproterenol infusion (total positives, 71%). Transcranial Doppler sonography demonstrated a 225% +/- 192% increase in pulsatility index and a 70% +/- 29% increase in resistance index (indicative of cerebral arteriolar vasoconstriction) at the time of vertigo. No control subject experienced syncope during this test. Each tilt-positive patient eventually became tilt-negative with therapy, and over a mean follow-up period of 26 months, no further episodes have occurred.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Streptomycin sulfate has been known to be ototoxic since its use in the treatment of tuberculosis. This report describes 10 years of experience in the treatment of Meniere's disease with streptomycin. Streptomycin has been used in classical Schuknecht ablation of the vestibular system in bilateral Meniere's disease; classical Schuknecht ablation of the vestibular system in unilateral Meniere's disease in the only hearing ear; intratympanic streptomycin in the treatment of unilateral Meniere's disease; and low-dose intramuscular streptomycin as outpatient treatment in unilateral Meniere's disease. The results of bilateral vestibular ablation were similar to Schuknecht's and others. Patients developed profound ataxia with a wide-based gait and oscillopsia, which improved rapidly over a period of months. Approximately 30% experienced significant improvement in hearing, which usually deteriorated again after several months. All patients were relieved of vertigo. Patients with unilateral Meniere's disease in the only hearing ear responded as did the bilateral cases. Hearing in the only hearing ear was preserved in all cases. Low-dose subototoxic streptomycin as outpatient treatment offers promise in some cases for relieving attacks of Meniere's disease while improving hearing without producing the temporary disabling effects of ataxia and oscillopsia. Streptomycin and similar drugs that may reduce the production of endolymph may eventually be the treatment of choice in Meniere's disease.

Acute vertigo occurring 48 hours after stapedectomy is assumed to be related to inner ear trauma. Similarly, acute vertigo occurring weeks after stapedectomy could be related to a fistula of the oval window. No one has tested the hypothesis that some of these cases could represent concomitant cranial polyneuritis. We report the development after stapedectomy of five cases of acute cranial polyneuritis with vertigo diagnosed by physical examination of the cranial nerves. In another case we determined that vertigo occurring after stapedectomy was not related to concomitant cranial polyneuritis. Although all the patients were treated with corticosteroids, the vertigo resolved within 12 to 24 hours only in those whose vertigo we had ascribed to polyneuritis.

Intramuscular dosages of streptomycin sulfate were titrated in eight patients with bilateral Meniere's disease in an attempt to alleviate disabling vertigo and hearing loss. It appears possible to eliminate the vertiginous episodes, preserve or improve hearing, and avoid ataxia and oscillopsia in most of these individuals. At present we consider this treatment regimen our first choice of therapy in people with bilateral active Meniere's disease or in patients whose only hearing ear is actively fluctuating and in whom associated disabling vertigo is present. Great caution and supervision should be exercised in the use of streptomycin titration therapy in the individual with bilateral Meniere's disease, as further experience is required to determine the efficacy of this form of management.