Intratympanic Dexamethasone in the Treatment of Ménière's Disease: A Comparison of Two Techniques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of two different intratympanic dexamethasone (IT Dex) injection protocols for intractable unilateral Ménière's disease. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective case series. SETTING: Tertiary neurotology clinic. PATIENTS: One hundred six consecutive adult patients with definite unilateral Ménière's disease who had failed medical management were studied for an average of 1,061 days. None had previous oral steroid, IT steroid, or ablative treatment. INTERVENTIONS: Two different IT Dex regimes, either a single injection or a series of four injections, that were subsequently repeated as indicated. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Requirement for subsequent ablative therapy in the form of intratympanic gentamicin, vestibular nerve section, or labyrinthectomy. Hearing outcomes were measured using pure-tone average of 0.5, 1, 2, and 3 kHz on standard audiometry. RESULTS: The number of intratympanic dexamethasone injections per patient ranged from 1 to 29 (median = 4). Using the Kaplan-Meier method, predicted survival (patients not requiring ablative therapy) at 2 and 4 years after initial treatment was 83.9 and 79.3%, respectively. The injection series protocol ultimately yielded 5% better survival than the single injection protocol, but this was not statistically significant. Injections did not protect against hearing loss, and the most recent pure-tone averages declined compared with pretreatment values by an average of 8.27 dB (p < 0.05). The treatments did not result in any acute hearing losses, permanent tympanic membrane perforations, or other significant adverse events. CONCLUSION: Intratympanic dexamethasone injections were successful in controlling vertigo insofar as they were able to obviate ablative therapy in the majority of Ménière's disease patients in this study. The injection series protocol may have been more beneficial compared with the single injection, although the difference between the two protocols was nonsignificant. Hearing mildly declined over the treatment course, which likely represents natural disease progression. The lack of adverse events suggests that IT Dex may be a nonablative option for patients with bilateral disease or only hearing/vestibular ears.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".