Venekamp Roderick P, Mick Paul, Schilder Anne Gm, Nunez Desmond A
Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care & Department of Otorhinolaryngology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, Utrecht, Netherlands, 3508 GA.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 May 9;5(5):CD012017. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012017.pub2.
Acute otitis media (AOM) is one of the most common childhood illnesses. While many children experience sporadic AOM episodes, an important group suffer from recurrent AOM (rAOM), defined as three or more episodes in six months, or four or more in one year. In this subset of children AOM poses a true burden through frequent episodes of ear pain, general illness, sleepless nights and time lost from nursery or school. Grommets, also called ventilation or tympanostomy tubes, can be offered for rAOM.
To assess the benefits and harms of bilateral grommet insertion with or without concurrent adenoidectomy in children with rAOM.
The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Trials Register; CENTRAL; MEDLINE; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 4 December 2017.
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing bilateral grommet insertion with or without concurrent adenoidectomy and no ear surgery in children up to age 16 years with rAOM. We planned to apply two main scenarios: grommets as a single surgical intervention and grommets as concurrent treatment with adenoidectomy (i.e. children in both the intervention and comparator groups underwent adenoidectomy). The comparators included active monitoring, antibiotic prophylaxis and placebo medication.
We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Primary outcomes were: proportion of children who have no AOM recurrences at three to six months follow-up (intermediate-term) and persistent tympanic membrane perforation (significant adverse event). Secondary outcomes were: proportion of children who have no AOM recurrences at six to 12 months follow-up (long-term); total number of AOM recurrences, disease-specific and generic health-related quality of life, presence of middle ear effusion and other adverse events at short-term, intermediate-term and long-term follow-up. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence for each outcome; this is indicated in italics.
Five RCTs (805 children) with unclear or high risk of bias were included. All studies were conducted prior to the introduction of pneumococcal vaccination in the countries' national immunisation programmes. In none of the trials was adenoidectomy performed concurrently in both groups.Grommets versus active monitoringGrommets were more effective than active monitoring in terms of:- proportion of children who had no AOM recurrence at six months (one study, 95 children, 46% versus 5%; risk ratio (RR) 9.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.38 to 37.80, number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) 3; low-quality evidence);- proportion of children who had no AOM recurrence at 12 months (one study, 200 children, 48% versus 34%; RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.99, NNTB 8; low-quality evidence);- number of AOM recurrences at six months (one study, 95 children, mean number of AOM recurrences per child: 0.67 versus 2.17, mean difference (MD) -1.50, 95% CI -1.99 to -1.01; low-quality evidence);- number of AOM recurrences at 12 months (one study, 200 children, one-year AOM incidence rate: 1.15 versus 1.70, incidence rate difference -0.55, 95% -0.17 to -0.93; low-quality evidence).Children receiving grommets did not have better disease-specific health-related quality of life (Otitis Media-6 questionnaire) at four (one study, 85 children) or 12 months (one study, 81 children) than those managed by active monitoring (low-quality evidence).One study reported no persistent tympanic membrane perforations among 54 children receiving grommets (low-quality evidence).Grommets versus antibiotic prophylaxisIt is uncertain whether or not grommets are more effective than antibiotic prophylaxis in terms of:- proportion of children who had no AOM recurrence at six months (two studies, 96 children, 60% versus 35%; RR 1.68, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.65, I = 0%, fixed-effect model, NNTB 5; very low-quality evidence);- number of AOM recurrences at six months (one study, 43 children, mean number of AOM recurrences per child: 0.86 versus 1.38, MD -0.52, 95% CI -1.37 to 0.33; very low-quality evidence).Grommets versus placebo medicationGrommets were more effective than placebo medication in terms of:- proportion of children who had no AOM recurrence at six months (one study, 42 children, 55% versus 15%; RR 3.64, 95% CI 1.20 to 11.04, NNTB 3; very low-quality evidence);- number of AOM recurrences at six months (one study, 42 children, mean number of AOM recurrences per child: 0.86 versus 2.0, MD -1.14, 95% CI -2.06 to -0.22; very low-quality evidence).One study reported persistent tympanic membrane perforations in 3 of 76 children (4%) receiving grommets (low-quality evidence).Subgroup analysisThere were insufficient data to determine whether presence of middle ear effusion at randomisation, type of grommet or age modified the effectiveness of grommets.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence on the effectiveness of grommets in children with rAOM is limited to five RCTs with unclear or high risk of bias, which were conducted prior to the introduction of pneumococcal vaccination. Low to very low-quality evidence suggests that children receiving grommets are less likely to have AOM recurrences compared to those managed by active monitoring and placebo medication, but the magnitude of the effect is modest with around one fewer episode at six months and a less noticeable effect by 12 months. The low to very low quality of the evidence means that these numbers need to be interpreted with caution since the true effects may be substantially different. It is uncertain whether or not grommets are more effective than antibiotic prophylaxis. The risk of persistent tympanic membrane perforation after grommet insertion was low.Widespread use of pneumococcal vaccination has changed the bacteriology and epidemiology of AOM, and how this might impact the results of prior trials is unknown. New and high-quality RCTs of grommet insertion in children with rAOM are therefore needed. These trials should not only focus on the frequency of AOM recurrences, but also collect data on the severity of AOM episodes, antibiotic consumption and adverse effects of both surgery and antibiotics. This is particularly important since grommets may reduce the severity of AOM recurrences and allow for topical rather than oral antibiotic treatment.
急性中耳炎(AOM)是儿童期最常见的疾病之一。虽然许多儿童会偶发AOM,但有相当一部分儿童患有复发性AOM(rAOM),即六个月内发作三次或更多次,或一年内发作四次或更多次。在这部分儿童中,AOM通过频繁的耳痛发作、全身不适、失眠以及在托儿所或学校缺勤等情况,给他们带来了实实在在的负担。鼓膜置管,也称为通气或鼓膜造口管,可用于治疗rAOM。
评估双侧鼓膜置管联合或不联合腺样体切除术对rAOM儿童的益处和危害。
Cochrane耳鼻喉信息专家检索了Cochrane耳鼻喉试验注册库、CENTRAL、MEDLINE、EMBASE、CINAHL、Web of Science、ClinicalTrials.gov、ICTRP以及其他已发表和未发表试验的来源。检索日期为2017年12月4日。
随机对照试验(RCT),比较16岁及以下rAOM儿童双侧鼓膜置管联合或不联合腺样体切除术与未进行耳部手术的情况。我们计划应用两种主要方案:鼓膜置管作为单一手术干预,以及鼓膜置管联合腺样体切除术(即干预组和对照组的儿童均接受腺样体切除术)。对照措施包括主动监测、抗生素预防和安慰剂治疗。
我们采用了Cochrane预期的标准方法程序。主要结局指标为:随访三至六个月时无AOM复发的儿童比例(中期)和持续性鼓膜穿孔(严重不良事件)。次要结局指标为:随访六至十二个月时无AOM复发的儿童比例(长期);AOM复发总数、疾病特异性和与健康相关的总体生活质量、短期、中期和长期随访时中耳积液的存在情况以及其他不良事件。我们使用GRADE评估每个结局指标的证据质量;这在文中以斜体表示。
纳入了5项偏倚风险不明确或较高的RCT(805名儿童)。所有研究均在各国国家免疫规划引入肺炎球菌疫苗之前进行。在所有试验中,两组均未同时进行腺样体切除术。
鼓膜置管与主动监测
在以下方面,鼓膜置管比主动监测更有效:
六个月时无AOM复发的儿童比例(一项研究,95名儿童,46%对5%;风险比(RR)9.49,95%置信区间(CI)2.38至37.80,需治疗获益人数(NNTB)3;低质量证据);
十二个月时无AOM复发的儿童比例(一项研究,200名儿童,48%对34%;RR 1.41,95% CI 1.00至1.99,NNTB 8;低质量证据);
六个月时AOM复发次数(一项研究,95名儿童,每名儿童AOM复发的平均次数:0.67对2.17,平均差(MD)-1.50,95% CI -1.99至-1.01;低质量证据);
十二个月时AOM复发次数(一项研究,200名儿童,一年AOM发病率:1.15对1.70,发病率差-0.55,95% -0.17至-0.93;低质量证据)。
接受鼓膜置管的儿童在四个月(一项研究;85名儿童)或十二个月(一项研究;81名儿童)时,与接受主动监测的儿童相比,疾病特异性健康相关生活质量(中耳炎-6问卷)并无改善(低质量证据)。
一项研究报告,54名接受鼓膜置管的儿童中未出现持续性鼓膜穿孔(低质量证据)。
鼓膜置管与抗生素预防
在以下方面,鼓膜置管是否比抗生素预防更有效尚不确定:
六个月时无AOM复发的儿童比例(两项研究,96名儿童,60%对35%;RR 1.68,95% CI 1.07至2.65,I² = 0%,固定效应模型,NNTB 5;极低质量证据);
六个月时AOM复发次数(一项研究,43名儿童,每名儿童AOM复发的平均次数:0.86对1.38,MD -0.52,95% CI -1.37至0.33;极低质量证据)。
鼓膜置管与安慰剂治疗
在以下方面,鼓膜置管比安慰剂治疗更有效:
六个月时无AOM复发的儿童比例(一项研究,42名儿童,55%对15%;RR 3.64,95% CI 1.20至11.04,NNTB 3;极低质量证据);
六个月时AOM复发次数(一项研究,42名儿童,每名儿童AOM复发的平均次数:0.86对2.0,MD -1.14,9% CI -2.06至-0.22;极低质量证据)。
一项研究报告,76名接受鼓膜置管的儿童中有3名(4%)出现持续性鼓膜穿孔(低质量证据)。
亚组分析
数据不足,无法确定随机分组时中耳积液的存在、鼓膜置管类型或年龄是否会改变鼓膜置管的有效性。
目前关于鼓膜置管对rAOM儿童有效性的证据仅限于5项偏倚风险不明确或较高的RCT,这些研究均在肺炎球菌疫苗引入之前进行。低至极低质量的证据表明,与接受主动监测和安慰剂治疗的儿童相比,接受鼓膜置管的儿童AOM复发的可能性较小,但效果幅度不大,六个月时复发次数约少一次,到十二个月时效果不太明显。证据质量低至极低意味着这些数字需要谨慎解读,因为真实效果可能有很大差异。鼓膜置管是否比抗生素预防更有效尚不确定。鼓膜置管后持续性鼓膜穿孔的风险较低。
肺炎球菌疫苗的广泛使用改变了AOM的细菌学和流行病学,这对先前试验结果可能产生的影响尚不清楚。因此,需要开展新的高质量的rAOM儿童鼓膜置管RCT。这些试验不仅应关注AOM复发的频率,还应收集AOM发作严重程度、抗生素使用情况以及手术和抗生素不良反应的数据。这一点尤为重要,因为鼓膜置管可能会降低AOM复发的严重程度,并允许采用局部而非口服抗生素治疗。