[Time of salvage treatment on XXXX ].

@entity1 @entity2319 @entity619 @entity1274 @entity479
OBJECTIVE: To explore the best time of intratympanic @entity619 injection to treat @entity1274 ( @entity1274 ) as salvage therapy so that to improve the curative efficacy on sudden @entity2319 at the utmost. METHOD: A total of 192 @entity1 with @entity1274 were included in this study, among whom 63 cases received the systemic @entity479 therapy throughout the study, while the other ones were treated with systemic @entity479 as initial treatment and were given intratympanic @entity479 administration as salvage treatment starting at different time point. The salvage treatment started on the 3rd day after the beginning of the initial treatment for 29 cases, on the 7th day for 38 cases, on the 14th day for 43 cases, and 1 month later for 19 cases. All the @entity1 were followed up for 2 months. RESULT: The recovery rates and total effective rates showed no statistically significant difference between the @entity1 received only systemic @entity479 therapy and the ones received intratympanic @entity479 administration on the 3rd, 7th day and 1 month later after the initial treatment. The recovery rate and total effective rate exhibited statistically significant difference between the @entity1 received intratympanic @entity479 administration since the 14th day after the initial treatment and the ones received only systemic @entity479 therapy, with the numerical value of P 0. 037 and 0. 034, respectively. CONCLUSION: (1) As an initial management plan, the curative effects. between the intratympanic @entity479 administration and the systemic @entity479 therapy were not significantly different. (2) As a salvage treatment, intratympanic @entity479 was a better choice for @entity1 who have not completely recover from ISSNHL after failure of initial management with systemic @entity479 only. (3) The best time point of salvage treatment with intratympanic @entity479 was about 2 weeks after initial management with systemic @entity479 .
