去纤维蛋白原治疗突发性感音神经性听力损失的疗效：系统评价与Meta分析
Efficacy of Defibrinogenation Therapy for Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
文献信息
| PMID | 42871297 |
|---|---|
| 原文 | 在 PubMed 查看原文 ↗ |
| 发表日期 | 2026 |
| 作者 | Jieun Shin |
| 作者单位 | Department of Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine Konyang University Daejeon Republic of Korea. |
| 期刊 | Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology |
| SCI 分区 | Q2 |
| IF | 2.1 |
| 研究类型 | 综述 Meta · 临床 |
| 所属专科 | 耳科 |
中文摘要
背景： 突发性感音神经性听力损失（SSNHL）是一种令人困惑的医学状况，其特征为快速听力下降，常伴有耳鸣和眩晕等症状。巴曲酶治疗的有效性尚不明确。
目的： 系统评价和Meta综合巴曲酶治疗对SSNHL的有效性。
材料与方法： 检索了PubMed、Embase和Cochrane图书馆，从建库至2025年10月31日。纳入标准如下：（1）临床诊断为SSNHL的患者，（2）干预措施包括处方去纤维蛋白原治疗（DT），如蛇毒凝血酶A、安克洛酶和/或巴曲酶，（3）对照为未接受DT的患者。两名研究人员根据PRISMA指南独立审查文献。结局为改善比例率，效应量使用比值比（OR）及相应的95%置信区间（CI）测量。
结果： 最终Meta分析共纳入7项研究，837名参与者（即治疗组561名，对照组276名）。与对照组相比，DT在改善听力方面无统计学显著性。尽管DT组和对照组之间的总体SSNHL改善有所提高，但总体效应量（以合并OR衡量）为1.897（95% CI，0.84至4.27），无统计学显著性。无对照组的总体SSNHL合并改善率为62.1%（95% CI，55.7%至68.5%）。
结论： 研究结果表明，去纤维蛋白原治疗对SSNHL并不比其他治疗更有效。
英文摘要
BACKGROUND: Sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL) is a perplexing medical condition characterized by rapid hearing decline, often accompanied by symptoms such as tinnitus and vertigo. Effectiveness of batroxobin treatment is not clearly known.
OBJECTIVE: To systematically review and meta-synthesize the effectiveness of Batroxobin treatment on SSNHL.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched from the inception date through October 31, 2025. The inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) patients with a clinical diagnosis of SSNHL, (2) interventions included prescription of defibrinogenation therapy (DT), such as venombin A, ancrod, and/or batroxobin, and (3) comparisons were controls who did not receive DT. Two researchers independently reviewed the literature according to the PRISMA guideline. The outcomes were improvement for proportional rate, and the effect size was measured using odds ratios (ORs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS: A total of 7 studies with 837 participants (i.e., 561 in the treatment group and 276 controls) were included in the final meta-analysis. DT was not statistically significant for improving hearing when compared to controls. Although the overall SSNHL improvement between DT and control groups improved, the overall effect size, as measured by the pooled OR, 1.897 (95% CI, 0.84 to 4.27), was not statistically significant. The pooled improvement rate for overall SSNHL without a comparison group was 62.1% (95% CI, 55.7% to 68.5%).
CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that defibrinogenation treatment is not more effective than other treatments for SSNHL.