{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.035206499661475966, 'fraction_numerical': 0.017603249830737983, 'mean_word_length': 5.236286919831223, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 2, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 1, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Defibrinogenation Therapy for Idiopathic Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss in Comparison with High-dose Steroid Therapy

Objective--The efficacy of defibrinogenation therapy for idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss was studied in comparison with high-dose steroid therapy. Material and methods--Eighty-eight consecutive patients with hearing levels >40 dB and who had suffered hearing loss for ≤30 days were enrolled: 40 patients for high-dose steroid therapy (PSL group) and 48 for defibrinogenation therapy (BX group). Hearing recovery was evaluated by grade assessment and by the improvement in hearing compared to the unaffected contralateral ear. Results--The overall hearing outcomes of the two groups were roughly equivalent. However, with regard to patients with initial hearing levels <80 dB, the hearing improvement rate of the BX group was significantly worse than that of the PSL group (61.2%±7.3% vs 88.7%±8.9%; p<0.05), whereas in patients with initial hearing levels ≥80 dB, the hearing outcomes did not differ between the 2 groups. Three patients in the PSL group manifested hyperglycemia while no serious side-effects were observed in the BX group. Conclusion--These results indicate that high-dose steroid therapy should be employed in preference to defibrinogenation therapy for patients with moderate hearing loss, whereas defibrinogenation therapy has an advantage for those with severe hearing loss, in view of its lower frequency of side-effects.