American journal of otolaryngology · 2021
Middle ear myoclonus: Systematic review of results and complications for various treatment approaches.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wong Wai Keat, Lee Michael Fook-Ho
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review of the diagnosis and treatment of patients with pulsatile tinnitus secondary to middle ear myoclonus.
DATABASES REVIEWED: PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus.
METHODS: A systematic review was performed using standardized methodology. Computerized and manual searches were performed to identify studies of all ages (patients) who had middle ear myoclonus (intervention). All study designs were assessed. Extracted data included demographics, clinical features, duration of followup as well as the diagnosis and reversibility of symptoms with medical or surgical intervention. Studies were included if they included subjects with middle ear myoclonus. Exclusion criteria included letters/commentaries and reviews.
RESULTS: Twenty articles representing 115 subjects with middle ear myoclonus were included. The mean age was 29.7 (range 6-67). The follow-up period ranged from 5 weeks to 36 months. Primary treatment consists of medical therapy utilising anxiolytics, antiepileptics, botulinum toxin and surgical treatment involving division of middle ear muscular tendon(s). In total, 60 patients underwent middle ear muscular tenotomies, with division of both stapedius and tensor tympani tendons being the most prevalent (88%). Limitations in the data arose from study design, related comorbidities such as palatal myoclonus, and concomitant drug administration. No study provided any objective criteria to diagnose this condition or evaluate post-treatment outcome.
CONCLUSION: Middle ear myoclonus is an entity that is poorly assessed in the literature. There is a lack of consensus regarding the criteria and strategies for both diagnosing and treating this condition. Although level of evidence of current studies remains modest, it is felt that a stepwise approach is deemed best, with therapeutic decisions being made on an individual basis, evaluating each patient's specific circumstances and priorities.
DATABASES REVIEWED: PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus.
METHODS: A systematic review was performed using standardized methodology. Computerized and manual searches were performed to identify studies of all ages (patients) who had middle ear myoclonus (intervention). All study designs were assessed. Extracted data included demographics, clinical features, duration of followup as well as the diagnosis and reversibility of symptoms with medical or surgical intervention. Studies were included if they included subjects with middle ear myoclonus. Exclusion criteria included letters/commentaries and reviews.
RESULTS: Twenty articles representing 115 subjects with middle ear myoclonus were included. The mean age was 29.7 (range 6-67). The follow-up period ranged from 5 weeks to 36 months. Primary treatment consists of medical therapy utilising anxiolytics, antiepileptics, botulinum toxin and surgical treatment involving division of middle ear muscular tendon(s). In total, 60 patients underwent middle ear muscular tenotomies, with division of both stapedius and tensor tympani tendons being the most prevalent (88%). Limitations in the data arose from study design, related comorbidities such as palatal myoclonus, and concomitant drug administration. No study provided any objective criteria to diagnose this condition or evaluate post-treatment outcome.
CONCLUSION: Middle ear myoclonus is an entity that is poorly assessed in the literature. There is a lack of consensus regarding the criteria and strategies for both diagnosing and treating this condition. Although level of evidence of current studies remains modest, it is felt that a stepwise approach is deemed best, with therapeutic decisions being made on an individual basis, evaluating each patient's specific circumstances and priorities.