Suppr超能文献

地塞米松在动物耳蜗植入模型中的听力保护作用:连续性、长效释放和快速释放率。

Dexamethasone delivery for hearing preservation in animal cochlear implant model: continuity, long-term release, and fast release rate.

机构信息

Department of Otolaryngology, Dankook University School of Medicine, Cheonan, South Korea.

Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, South Korea.

出版信息

Acta Otolaryngol. 2020 Sep;140(9):713-722. doi: 10.1080/00016489.2020.1763457. Epub 2020 May 23.

Abstract

Clinically, steroids have been used for hearing preservation both topically and systemically during cochlear implantation. This study compared steroid efficacy for hearing preservation among different types of delivery modes using an animal experiment. For 76 guinea pigs, topical and systemic delivery methods, four pump types with different infusion rates, delivery durations, and total steroid amounts were used. Threshold changes of 8, 16, and 32 kHz after dummy electrode insertion were evaluated at 1 and 4 weeks and compared among delivery method and pump types. Inflammatory response in the cochlea was histologically compared. For topical delivery groups, long-term release showed advantages in preserving hearing. Systemic delivery groups showed smaller threshold shifts than control group in all frequencies ( > .05). In short-term low dose application, compared to topical delivery, systemic delivery showed advantage in hearing preservation at both time point. However, others fail to show significant difference between two methods. Histologically, inflammatory response in the scala tympani at the basal turn was less in systemic delivery, especially in high dose and long-term. The difference of hearing preservation was not obvious between two delivery methods. Higher dose and longer duration might have advantages in hearing preservation.

摘要

临床上,在进行人工耳蜗植入时,类固醇已被用于局部和全身治疗以保护听力。本研究通过动物实验比较了不同给药方式的类固醇在听力保护方面的效果。 对 76 只豚鼠,采用局部和全身给药方法,使用四种具有不同输注率、给药持续时间和总类固醇量的泵。在 1 周和 4 周时评估假电极插入后 8、16 和 32 kHz 的阈值变化,并比较给药方式和泵类型之间的差异。比较耳蜗的炎症反应。对于局部给药组,长效释放在听力保护方面具有优势。与对照组相比,全身给药组在所有频率( > .05)的阈值变化较小。在短期低剂量应用中,与局部给药相比,全身给药在两个时间点都显示出听力保护的优势。然而,其他方法未能显示两种方法之间的显著差异。组织学上,在基底回的鼓阶中,全身给药的炎症反应较小,尤其是在高剂量和长期应用时。两种给药方式在听力保护方面的差异并不明显。较高的剂量和较长的持续时间可能在听力保护方面具有优势。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验