Suppr超能文献

研究其他耳蜗参数:一项随访的系统评价和荟萃分析。

Investigating Additional Cochlear Parameters: A follow-up systematic review and meta-analysis.

作者信息

Curtis Deven P, Baumann Anthony N, Salmen Natasha, Jeyakumar Anita

机构信息

Northeast Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, OH, USA.

Bon Secours Mercy Health, Youngstown, OH, USA.

出版信息

J Otol. 2024 Jul;19(3):178-183. doi: 10.1016/j.joto.2024.03.001. Epub 2024 Oct 19.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The movement towards personalization of cochlear implantation has continued to generate interest about variabilities in cochlear size. In a recent meta-analysis, Atalay et al. (2022) examined organ of corti length, cochlear lateral wall, and "A" value and found that most covariates, other than congenital sensorineural hearing loss, did not impact cochlear size via these measurements. However, no meta-analysis exists on how patient-specific variables could impact other cochlear size measurements, such as cochlear height (CH), and "B" value (defined as the distance between opposite lateral walls and perpendicular to "A" value). The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to examine how patient-specific variables impact additional cochlear size measurements to assist clinical decision-making.

DATABASES REVIEWED

A systematic review for cochlear size measurements using PRISMA methodology was performed using PubMed, CINAHL, and MEDLINE from database inception to October 1st, 2022.

METHODS

Search terms used included English, cochlea, size, histology, anatomy, and human. Inclusion criteria were measurements for human cochlea, full-text articles, and articles in English. Primary measurements were "B" value and CH, as these measurements differ from the recent meta-analysis on this topic. Cochlear duct length (CDL) was also included. A random-effects continuous model for meta-analysis was performed. Measurements were stratified by gender (male/female) and disease type (sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL)/conductive hearing loss (CHL)).

RESULTS

A total of 7 articles met final inclusion criteria from a total of 674 articles received on initial search, resulting in 2263 total human cochleae. There was a statistical difference between male CDL (n = 681 cochlea) compared to female CDL (n = 657) from four articles (p < 0.001; Cohen's d effect size (ES):0.421; 95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.171, 0.671). The frequency weighted mean for male CDL was 33.5 mm ± 1.8 mm and the frequency weighted mean for female CDL was 32.4 mm ± 1.5 mm with an unstandardized mean difference of 0.854 mm. There was no statistical difference between male "B" value (n = 329) and female "B" value (n = 349) for cochlea from two studies (p = 0.184; Cohen's d ES: 0.410; 95% CI: 0.194, 1.014). The frequency weighted mean for male "B" value was 6.5 mm ± 0.1 mm and the frequency weighted mean for female "B" value was 6.4 mm ± 0.1 mm with an unstandardized mean difference of 0.126 mm. There was no statistical difference between CH for SNHL (n = 282) and CHL (n = 275) from two studies (p = 0.486; ES: 0.085; 95% CI: 0.323, 0.153, F ig. 3). The frequency weighted mean for SNHL CH was 4.6 mm ± 0.8 mm and the frequency weighted mean for CHL CH was 4.3 mm ± 0.8 mm with an unstandardized mean difference of 0.032 mm.

CONCLUSION

Male CDL is statistically larger than female CDL. There is no statistically significant association between gender or hearing loss type and "B" value or CH. The effect size for all comparisons is small, indicating little practical significance between any existing differences. The results of this study provide two additional cochlear metrics and indicate similar findings to the study by Atalay and colleagues as patient-specific characteristics appear to have no statistically significantly impact on cochlear size.

摘要

目的

人工耳蜗植入个性化的发展持续引发人们对耳蜗大小差异的关注。在最近的一项荟萃分析中,阿塔莱等人(2022年)研究了柯蒂氏器长度、耳蜗外侧壁和“A”值,发现除先天性感音神经性听力损失外,大多数协变量并未通过这些测量影响耳蜗大小。然而,目前尚无关于患者特异性变量如何影响其他耳蜗大小测量值的荟萃分析,如耳蜗高度(CH)和“B”值(定义为相对外侧壁之间且垂直于“A”值的距离)。本系统评价和荟萃分析的目的是研究患者特异性变量如何影响额外的耳蜗大小测量值,以辅助临床决策。

数据库检索

从数据库建立至2022年10月1日,使用PubMed、CINAHL和MEDLINE,采用PRISMA方法对耳蜗大小测量进行了系统评价。

方法

使用的检索词包括英文、耳蜗、大小、组织学、解剖学和人类。纳入标准为人耳蜗测量、全文文章以及英文文章。主要测量值为“B”值和CH,因为这些测量值与该主题最近的荟萃分析不同。还纳入了耳蜗管长度(CDL)。进行了随机效应连续模型荟萃分析。测量值按性别(男/女)和疾病类型(感音神经性听力损失(SNHL)/传导性听力损失(CHL))分层。

结果

在初步检索得到的674篇文章中,共有7篇文章符合最终纳入标准,共计2263个成人耳蜗。来自4篇文章的男性CDL(n = 681个耳蜗)与女性CDL(n = 657个)之间存在统计学差异(p < 0.001;科恩d效应量(ES):0.421;95%置信区间(CI):0.171,0.671)。男性CDL的频率加权平均值为33.5 mm±1.8 mm,女性CDL的频率加权平均值为32.4 mm±1.5 mm,未标准化平均差为0.854 mm。两项研究中,男性耳蜗的“B”值(n = 329)与女性耳蜗的“B”值(n = 349)之间无统计学差异(p = 0.184;科恩d ES:0.410;95% CI:0.194,1.014)。男性“B”值的频率加权平均值为6.5 mm±0.1 mm,女性“B”值的频率加权平均值为6.4 mm±0.1 mm,未标准化平均差为0.126 mm。两项研究中,SNHL(n = 282)和CHL(n = 275)的CH之间无统计学差异(p = 0.486;ES:0.085;95% CI:0.323,0.153,图3)。SNHL的CH频率加权平均值为4.6 mm±0.8 mm,CHL的CH频率加权平均值为4.3 mm±0.8 mm,未标准化平均差为0.032 mm。

结论

男性的CDL在统计学上大于女性。性别或听力损失类型与“B”值或CH之间无统计学显著关联。所有比较的效应量都很小,表明任何现有差异之间的实际意义不大。本研究结果提供了另外两个耳蜗测量指标,并表明与阿塔莱及其同事的研究结果相似,因为患者特异性特征似乎对耳蜗大小没有统计学显著影响。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4a7a/11681789/3314a1ea39fe/gr1.jpg

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