Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Sudden Hearing Loss
Sudden Hearing Loss
Autoimmunity Reviews
j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w. e l s ev i e r. c o m / l o c a t e / a u t r ev
Review
a r t i c l e
i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Objectives: To review our current knowledge of the pathogenesis of sudden sensorineural hearing loss,
including viral infection, vascular occlusion and immune system-mediated mechanisms, and to discuss the
pathogenesis as it relates to pharmacotherapy.
Systematic review methodology: Relevant publications on the pathogenesis of sudden sensorineural hearing
loss from 1944 to 2010 were analysed.
Results and conclusions: Sudden sensorineural hearing loss is dened as hearing loss of 30 dB in three
sequential frequencies over 3 days or less. It can be an isolated symptom or the presenting symptom of a
systemic disease. The aetiology and pathogenesis remain unknown. Detailed investigation typically reveals a
specic cause in about 10% of patients. Proposed theories of causation include viral infections, vascular
occlusion and immune system-mediated mechanisms. A variety of therapies have been proposed based on
the various proposed aetiologies.
2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Article history:
Received 1 May 2011
Accepted 5 May 2011
Available online 18 May 2011
Keywords:
Measles virus
Hearing loss
Autoimmunity
Contents
1.
Introduction . . . . . . . . . .
1.1.
Aetiology . . . . . . . .
1.2.
Viral hypothesis . . . . .
1.3.
Vascular theory . . . . .
1.4.
Immunologic theory . . .
1.5.
Therapeutic considerations
2.
Conclusions . . . . . . . . . .
Take-home messages . . . . . . . .
References . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1. Introduction
Sudden sensorineural hearing loss was described for the rst time
by De Klein in 1944, and it is dened as hearing loss of at least 30 dB in
three sequential frequencies in the standard pure tone audiogram
over 3 days or less [1]. It occurs abruptly and is a frightening
experience for patients.
The incidence of sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSHL) has
been reported to range from 5 to 20 cases per 100,000 persons per
year [2]. British surveys have estimated between 5 and 30 cases per
100,000 per year [3,4]. However, a German study reported an
incidence of up to 160 cases per 100,000 per year [5]. The disease
Corresponding author at: P.zza Acilia no. 4, 00100 Rome, Italy. Tel.: +39 3355948375.
E-mail addresses: antonio.greco@uniroma1.it, giano1979@hotmail.com (A. Greco).
1568-9972/$ see front matter 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.autrev.2011.05.005
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
756
756
757
758
758
759
759
759
759
757
Fig. 1. Photomicrographs of cochleas. A cochlea in patient with sensorineural hearing loss with decrease in spiral ganglion. B normal cochlea. Picture taken from: Vasama JP,
Linthicum FH. Idiopatic sudden sensorineural hearing loss: temporal bone hystopathologic study. Ann. Otol. Rhinol. Laryngol 109: 2000. 527532.
758
759
760
761
Is SF-36 a reliable outcome of neurophychiatric events in patients affected with systemic lupus erythematosus?
Neuropsychiatric events in patients affected with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) represent a poor prognostic factor and until now none
of the known approaches for the outcome assessment of these patients, such as neuroimaging alone or in combination with clinical variable
have been validated.
The Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) proposes the short form SF-36 as reliable outcome measure for the study of
neuropsychiatric events in SLE patients (Ann Rheum Dis 2011; 50:961-67). The Authors consider a large cohort of 1,400 SLE patients and
identied 274 patients that had one or more neuropsychiatric events. The SF-36, particularly the mental component summary, changed in
the appropriate direction in association with both clinical improvement and worsening.
In conclusion SF-36 should be considered as a reliable outcome of neuropsychiatric events in SLE patients.
Luca Iaccarino