Home About Us Contact Us

 

Table of Content - Volume 20 Issue 1 - October 2021


 

Study of clinical profile of patients with sudden onset sensorineural hearing loss at a tertiary hospital

 

Shripad Harihar Patil1*, Sham V Rane2

 

1Additional Civil Surgeon, 2DLO, District Civil Hospital, Sindhudurg, Maharashtra, INDIA.

Email: visupatil@gmail.com

 

Abstract              Background: Sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL) is an otologic emergency defined as sensorineural hearing loss ≥ 30 dB that affects at least 3 consecutive frequencies and occurs within a 72-hour window. Present study was aimed to study clinical profile of patients with sudden onset sensorineural hearing loss at a tertiary hospital. Material and Methods: Present study was single-center, retrospective study, conducted in case records of patients with sudden onset sensorineural hearing loss. Results: We studied total 74 case records. All patients were compared according to recovery status. Recovery was noticed in 31 patients (41.89 %) while no or less than 50 % recovery was noticed in 43 patients (58.11 %). Majority of patients were from 41-60 years age group (43.24 %) and in patients with recovery, mean age was 41.87 ± 9.34 years as compared to patients without recovery as 50.51 ± 10.78 years and difference was statistically significant (p<0.05). Gender was comparable among total patients as well as patients with or without recovery and difference was statistically not significant (p>0.05). Hypertension (33.78 %), diabetes (17.57 %), dyslipidemia (20.27 %) and thyroid disorder (8.11 %) were common comorbidities noted among patients. Vertigo was significant in patients without recovery (68.75 %) as compared to patients with recovery (31.25 %) and difference was statistically significant (p<0.05). Degree Of hearing loss was mild (8.11 %), moderate (10.81 %), moderately severe (20.27 %), severe (25.68 %) and profound (35.14 %). Incidence of patients without recovery was increased with increase in severity of hearing loss and difference was statistically significant (p<0.05). Time to initiate treatment was ≤ 14 days (62.16 %) in majority of patients followed by 15-30 days (25.68 %) and >30 days (12.16 %). Recovery was noted in early initiation of treatment and difference was statistically significant (p<0.05). Conclusion: In patients with sudden onset sensorineural hearing loss age less than 40 years, no comorbidities, lesser degree of hearing loss, early (<14 days) initiation of treatment are factors associated with recovery.

Keywords: sudden onset sensorineural hearing loss, vertigo, profound hearing loss, prednisolone

 

INTRODUCTION

Sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL) is an otologic emergency defined as sensorineural hearing loss ≥ 30 dB that affects at least 3 consecutive frequencies and occurs within a 72-hour window.1 The incidence of SSNHL is estimated at 5 to 27 per 100,000 people annually.2 Chronic sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) accounts for roughly 90% of this sensory deficit and is likely caused by noise, chemical, viral, and aging insults with potentially debilitating effects.3,4 In people with SNHL, audibility (loudness of sound) and intelligibility (clarity of words) deteriorate due to the aforementioned auditory insults. Recently, microcirculation disturbance has been hypothesized as the main etiology. Any disease interrupting the cochlear perfusion may eventually result in a reduction of the oxygen supply to cochlea and trigger ISSNHL. Cardiovascular and metabolic diseases such as hypertension, diabetes mellitus (DM) and hyperlipidemia, reduces the elasticity of blood vessels and induce the formation of atherosclerosis, thus causing microangiopathy.5,6 Audiological evaluation provides a criterion for the diagnosis of ISSNHL; in the case of retro-cochlear lesions, further investigations like imaging studies are necessary to rule out other causes like vestibular Schwannoma, cerebro-vascular accidents and the like. Present study was aimed to study clinical profile of patients with sudden onset sensorineural hearing loss at a tertiary hospital.

              

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Present study was single-center, retrospective study, conducted in Department of otorhinolaryngology, at District Civil Hospital, Sindhudurg, India. Study approval was taken from institutional ethical committee. Case records of patients with sudden onset sensorineural hearing loss examined between January 2016 to December 2020 were considered for present study. The diagnosis of all the patients had been made by experienced Otolaryngologists. Patient’s demographic data, onset, and duration of hearing loss, associated symptoms, presence of cardiovascular risk factors and other co-morbid factors, findings of clinical examination, initial diagnosis were noted. Findings of various blood investigations such as complete haemogram, serum electrolytes, thyroid function tests, findings of initial audiogram, treatment received were documented. As per standard medical treatment, Tapering dose of oral prednisolone for fourteen days was administered (60 mg/day for 5 days, followed by 50 mg/day for 3 days, followed by 40 mg for 2 day, followed by 30 mg for 1 day, followed by 20 mg for 1 day, followed by 10 mg for 1 day, and followed by 5 mg for 1 day), with oral pentoxifylline 400 mg twice per day. In all cases, the hearing assessment was done by pure tone audiometry on the day of presentation and weekly after treatment initiation until one month. The hearing improvement was evaluated based on the change in hearing threshold from the pre-treatment to the 1-month follow-up audiogram. Recovery was considered when post-treatment PTA that was ≥ 50% of the reference hearing level. Data was collected and compiled using Microsoft Excel, analysed using SPSS 23.0 version. Frequency, percentage, means and standard deviations (SD) was calculated for the continuous variables, while ratios and proportions were calculated for the categorical variables. Difference of proportions between qualitative variables were tested using chi- square test or Fisher exact test as applicable. P value less than 0.5 was considered as statistically significant.

 

RESULTS

We studied total 74 case records. All patients were compared according to recovery status. Recovery was noticed in 31 patients (41.89 %) while no or less than 50 % recovery was noticed in 43 patients (58.11 %). Majority of patients were from 41-60 years age group (43.24 %) followed by from 21-40 years age group (29.73 %). In patients with recovery, mean age was 41.87 ± 9.34 years as compared to patients without recovery as 50.51 ± 10.78 years and difference was statistically significant (p<0.05). Gender was comparable among total patients as well as patients with or without recovery and difference was statistically not significant (p>0.05). Hypertension (33.78 %), diabetes (17.57 %), dyslipidemia (20.27 %) and thyroid disorder (8.11 %) were common comorbidities noted among patients. We compared comorbidities among patients with or without recovery and difference was statistically not significant (p>0.05).


 

Table 1: General characteristics

Characteristics

Total (n=74)

With recovery (n=31)

Without recovery (n=43)

P value

No. of patients,

(%)

No. of patients,

(%)

No. of patients,

(%)

 

Age (years)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

≤ 20

4

5.41%

3

75.00%

1

25.00%

 

21-40

22

29.73%

9

40.91%

13

59.09%

 

41-60

32

43.24%

13

40.63%

19

59.38%

 

>60

16

21.62%

6

37.50%

10

62.50%

 

Mean Age (years)

47.66 ± 13.54

41.87 ± 9.34

50.51 ± 10.78

<0.05

Gender

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Male

36

48.65%

16

44.44%

20

55.56%

>0.05

Female

38

51.35%

15

39.47%

23

60.53%

 

Comorbidity

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hypertension

25

33.78%

7

28.00%

18

72.00%

>0.05

Diabetes

13

17.57%

5

38.46%

8

61.54%

>0.05

Dyslipidemia

15

20.27%

4

26.67%

11

73.33%

>0.05

Thyroid disorder

6

8.11%

2

33.33%

4

66.67%

>0.05

Autoimmune disease

1

1.35%

0

0.00%

1

100.00%

0

 

Vertigo was significant in patients without recovery (68.75 %) as compared to patients with recovery (31.25 %) and difference was statistically significant (p<0.05). Tinnitus was comparable in patients with recovery (41.94 %) as well as patients without recovery (58.06 %) and difference was statistically not significant (p>0.05).

Table 2: Clinical features

Clinical features

Total (n=74)

With recovery (n=31)

Without recovery (n=43)

P value

No. of patients,

(%)

No. of patients,

(%)

No. of patients,

(%)

 

Vertigo

32

43.24%

10

31.25%

22

68.75%

<0.05

Tinnitus

62

83.78%

26

41.94%

36

58.06%

>0.05

 

Audiogram curve was flat, U-shaped, reverse U-shaped (47.30 %) in majority of patients followed by descending (36.49 %) and ascending (16.22 %).

Table 3: Audiogram curve

Audiogram curve

Total (n=74)

With recovery (n=31)

Without recovery (n=43)

P value

No. of patients,

(%)

No. of patients,

(%)

No. of patients,

(%)

Ascending

12

16.22%

6

50.00%

6

50.00%

0.015

Descending

27

36.49%

8

29.63%

19

70.37%

 

Flat, U-shaped, reverse U-shaped

35

47.30%

14

40.00%

21

60.00%

 

 

Degree of hearing loss was mild (8.11 %), moderate (10.81 %), moderately severe (20.27 %), severe (25.68 %) and profound (35.14 %). Incidence of patients without recovery was increased with increase in severity of hearing loss and difference was statistically significant (p<0.05).

Table 4: Degree Of hearing loss

Degree Of hearing loss

Total (n=74)

With recovery (n=31)

Without recovery (n=43)

P value

No. of patients,

(%)

No. of patients,

(%)

No. of patients,

(%)

Mild

6

8.11%

2

33.33%

4

66.67%

0.012

Moderate

8

10.81%

3

37.50%

5

62.50%

 

Moderately severe

15

20.27%

8

53.33%

7

46.67%

 

Severe

19

25.68%

12

63.16%

7

36.84%

 

Profound

26

35.14%

6

23.08%

20

76.92%

 

 

Time to initiate treatment was ≤ 14 days (62.16 %) in majority of patients followed by 15-30 days (25.68 %) and >30 days (12.16 %). Recovery was noted in early initiation of treatment and difference was statistically significant (p<0.05).

Table 5: Time to initiate treatment

Time to initiate treatment (days)

Total (n=74)

With recovery (n=31)

Without recovery (n=43)

P value

No. of patients,

(%)

No. of patients,

(%)

No. of patients,

(%)

 

≤ 14

46

62.16%

24

52.17%

22

47.83%

0.009

15-30

19

25.68%

5

26.32%

14

73.68%

 

>30

9

12.16%

2

22.22%

7

77.78%

 

 


DISCUSSION

Idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSNHL) is an emergency disease requiring immediate diagnosis and treatment. The etiology of ISSNHL remains unknown. Its pathogenesis is most often suggested to be due to a disturbed microcirculation and infection. Purushothaman G et al.,7 studied 122 patients, 58% had complete recovery and 28% had partial recovery. The average pre-treatment PTA was 78.3±16.9 dB whereas post-treatment average was 47.0±20.8 dB, showing statistically significant improvement (t=24.89, P≤0.001). The factors such as presence of tinnitus (P=0.005) and initial milder hearing loss (P=0.005) were found to be significant predictors for hearing recovery. Conventional steroid regimes produced a recovery rate in ISSNHL, which exceeds the spontaneous recovery rate. Adriana P et al.,8 studied idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSNHL) among 186 patients, majority patients were between 41 and 60 years of age. Univariate analysis revealed that vertigo; presence of severe or profound initial hearing loss; flat, U-shaped, and descending audiogram curves; and initiating treatment after 15 days were correlated with worse hearing recovery. However, the multivariate logistic model revealed that only the presence of severe or profound hearing loss (odds ratio, 6.634; 95% CI, 2.714-16.216; P \ .001) and initiating treatment after 15 days (odds ratio, 0.250; 95% CI, 0.102-0.610; P= .008) were independent risk factors for worse hearing recovery prognosis. Wen Xie et al.,9 noted annual incidence of ISSNHL in China mainland as 19 per 100 000. Also patients with vertigo, hypertension, DM and high TG suffered more often from severe hearing loss compared with the counterparts. This indicates that the cardiovascular and metabolic diseases (hypertension and hyperlipidemia) appeared to be closely associated with the occurrence and severity of ISSNHL. In an updated Cochrane systematic review based on 3 randomized controlled trials, as well as another recent review, both concluded that the importance of steroids in the treatment of ISSNHL remains unclear.10,11 Even though, inconsistent results regarding the treatment success have been reported, steroid treatment is one of the treatment options that has shown efficacy In study by Lee HS et al.,12 starting treatment after 14 days of hearing loss onset was an independent factor for worse hearing recovery. Many preceding reports described a delayed start to treatment as a negative prognostic factor.9,13,23 This finding may be explained by the possible modification of the inflammatory cell death cascade in SSNHL with the use of corticosteroids, as well as the suggestion that corticosteroids offer the most remarkable recovery in the first 2 weeks. The theory of blood circulation disturbance might be the etiology of some cases of ISSHL. A transient reduction in blood pressure values, commonly occurs in young subjects without vascular risk factors, which may cause cochlear ischemia and reversible hearing impairment, and restoration.13 A prolonged period of unilateral hearing or pseudo hearing can lead to hearing deterioration in the better ear. To avoid the same, cochlear implantation has to be considered over other management options in asymmetrical or unilateral hearing loss cases.

 

CONCLUSION

In patients with sudden onset sensorineural hearing loss age less than 40 years, no comorbidities, lesser degree of hearing loss, early (<14 days) initiation of treatment are factors associated with recovery.

 

REFERENCES

  1. Zadeh MH, Storper IS, Spitzer JB. Diagnosis and treatment of sudden-onset sensorineural hearing loss: a study of 51 patients. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2003;128:92-8.
  2. Chandrasekhar SS, Tsai Do BS, Schwartz SR, et al. Clinical practice guideline: sudden hearing loss (update). Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2019;161(1):S1-S45.
  3. Li L, Chao T, Brant J, O’Malley B Jr, Tsourkas A, Li D. Advances in nano-based inner ear delivery systems for the treatment of sensorineural hearing loss. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2017;108:2–12.
  4. BasnerM,BrinkM,Bristow A, et al. ICBENreviewof research on the biological effects of noise 2011-2014. Noise Health 2015;17:57–82.
  5. Fasano, T. et al. Laboratory assessment of sudden sensorineural hearing loss: A case-control study. Laryngoscope 127, 2375–2381, 2017.
  6. Koo, M. and Hwang, J. H. Risk of sudden sensorineural hearing loss in patients with common preexisting sensorineural hearing impairment: a population-based study in Taiwan. PLoS One 10, e0121190, 2015.
  7. Ganesan P, Kothandaraman PP, Swapna S, Manchaiah V. A Retrospective Study of the Clinical Characteristics and Post-treatment Hearing Outcome in Idiopathic Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss. Audiol Res. 2017 Feb 15;7(1):168.
  8. Perez Ferreira Neto A, da Costa Monsanto R, Dore Saint Jean L, Sonzzini Ribeiro de Souza L, de Oliveira Penido N. Clinical Profile of Patients With Unilateral Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss: Correlation With Hearing Prognosis. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2021 Oct;165(4):563-570.
  9. Xie, W., Dai, Q., Liu, J. et al. Analysis of Clinical and Laboratory Findings of Idiopathic Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss. Sci Rep 10, 6057, 2020.
  10. Wei BP, Stathopoulos D, O’Leary S. Steroids for idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013.
  11. Fernández MM, Kornetsky S, Rodriguez LR. Ethics of placebo control in trials for idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2016;155:8-12.
  12. Lee HS, Lee YJ, Kang BS, Lee BD, Lee JS. A clinical analysis of sudden sensorineural hearing loss cases. Korean J Audiol. 2014;18(2):69-75.
  13. Pirodda, A., Ferri, G. G., Modugno, G. C. and Borghi, C. Systemic hypotension and the development of acute sensorineural hearing loss in young healthy subjects. Archives of otolaryngology-head and neck surgery 127, 1049–1052, 2001.


 



















 








 




 








 

 









Policy for Articles with Open Access
Authors who publish with MedPulse International Journal of Anesthesiology (Print ISSN:2579-0900) (Online ISSN: 2636-4654) agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post links to their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.