Vertiginous Episodes in Menière Disease following Transmyringeal Ventilation Tube Insertion: A Systematic Review on the Current State of Evidence

Abstract Introduction Menière disease (MD) is a disorder characterized by episodes of vertigo, sensorineural hearing loss, tinnitus and aural fullness. Objectives To assess the effect of ventilation tube insertion (VTI) on vertiginous episodes in patients (≥ 18 years old) with MD. Data Synthesis A systematic literature search on randomized clinical trials (RCTs), nonrandomized trials and other systematic reviews was performed. The Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the overall certainty of evidence. Two RCTs and four nonrandomized studies were identified. Data extraction was only possible for one RCT. Results showed that the number of patients with no vertigo attacks significantly increased following active treatment (relative risk 1.52; [95% confidence interval: 1.19-1.94]). The quality of evidence was rated as low. None of the nonrandomized trials included a proper control group, which hindered data extraction and quality assessment. Conclusion There are currently no RCTs that specifically assess the efficacy of VTI in patients with MD. Current limited data suggest a considerable positive effect on the number of vertiginous episodes in patients with MD. However, due to poor evidence, a fluctuating course and a substantial placebo-effect associated with MD-treatment, no solid conclusion(s) regarding the efficacy of VTI can be made. There is a need for high-quality RCTs.

Vertiginous Episodes in Menière Disease following Transmyringeal Ventilation Tube Insertion: A Systematic Review on the Current State of Evidence.

Introduction Menière disease (MD) is a disorder characterized by episodes of vertigo, sensorineural hearing loss, tinnitus and aural fullness. Objectives To assess the effect of ventilation tube insertion (VTI) on vertiginous episodes in patients (≥ 18 years old) with MD. Data Synthesis A systematic literature search on randomized clinical trials (RCTs), nonrandomized trials and other systematic reviews was performed. The Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the overall certainty of evidence. Two RCTs and four nonrandomized studies were identified. Data extraction was only possible for one RCT. Results showed that the number of patients with no vertigo attacks significantly increased following active treatment (relative risk 1.52; [95% confidence interval: 1.19-1.94]). The quality of evidence was rated as low. None of the nonrandomized trials included a proper control group, which hindered data extraction and quality assessment. Conclusion There are currently no RCTs that specifically assess the efficacy of VTI in patients with MD. Current limited data suggest a considerable positive effect on the number of vertiginous episodes in patients with MD. However, due to poor evidence, a fluctuating course and a substantial placebo-effect associated with MD-treatment, no solid conclusion(s) regarding the efficacy of VTI can be made. There is a need for high-quality RCTs.

Intratympanic Steroid for Menière's Disease: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the beneficial effects and safety of intratympanic steroid installation compared with placebo in patients with Menière's disease. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search in MEDLINE and EMBASE for existing systematic reviews and individual randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Studies were included if they investigated the usage intratympanic steroids in patients aged 18 and above, with definite or probable Menière's disease. The quality of the identified existing reviews was assessed using the AMSTAR tool. The risk of bias in RCTs was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and overall quality of the individual outcomes was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) method. RESULTS: The literature search provided four systematic reviews, from which one yielded a sufficient AMSTAR evaluation and subsequently provided three RCTs relevant for inclusion. Due to the lack of sufficient reporting of the data, quantitative synthesis was not applicable. In the qualitative synthesis for the primary outcome, the results from the RCTs showed that there was a slight indication of steroid treatment reducing the frequency of vertiginous attacks. No serious adverse events were reported. Based on the GRADE approach the quality for both findings is very low. No studies reported on the secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: The effect of intratympanic steroid treatment in Menière's disease is questionable. There is a great need for further research to sufficiently assess whether steroid treatment may be considered as a safe and effective treatment for patients with Menière's disease.

Positive pressure device treatment for Menière's disease: an overview of the current evidence and a meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to critically assess the current evidence investigating the efficacy of using a positive pressure device in patients with definite or probable Menière's disease. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search in MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO up to February 2018. We included both systematic reviews and primary literature [randomized controlled trials (RCTs)] investigating positive pressure treatment, in patients (≥ 18 years of age), with Menière's disease. We assessed the internal validity of systematic reviews using the AMSTAR tool and risk of bias of primary studies using the Cochrane Risk of bias tool. We performed a meta-analysis for each outcome based on the identified studies. The overall certainty of evidence for the outcomes was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE). RESULTS: The search for systematic reviews identified four relevant reviews. These all included the same four RCTs. An updated search identified one additional RCT. In total, five RCTs were included in the data synthesis. Our data synthesis showed no effect of positive pressure treatment on primary nor secondary outcomes. No serious adverse events were reported. The overall certainty of evidence ranged from very low to low, due to the serious risk of bias and imprecision. CONCLUSION: The current available evidence does not support positive pressure device treatment in patients with Menière's disease. However, the limitations of the current literature hinder the possibility of any solid conclusion. There remains a need for randomized controlled trials of high quality to fully access the utility of this treatment.