CLINICAL AND ELECTRON-MICROSCOPIC STUDY FOR EVALUATION OF TREATMENT OF SUDDEN HEARING-LOSS WITH THE COMBINATION 10-PERCENT HES 200/0.5 AND PENTOXIFYLLIN

The incidence of sudden hearing loss has increased. The pathogenetic mechanisms are still unknown, but viral infections and vascular phenomena with acute impairment of microvascular perfusion are thought to play a major role. Infusion of hydroxyethyl starch (HES) is used as a regimen to treat sudden hearing loss. In our clinic, anaphylactic reactions due to HES have not been observed so far. However, the use of HES is still discussed controversially due to long-term storage of HES molecules in tissue and due to high incidence of long-lasting pruritus. In a retrospective analysis of 118 patients treated with HES for sudden hearing loss, we observed pruritus starting in 64% of patients one to three weeks after therapy. This symptom with a duration between two weeks and four months was refractory to medical interventions. During therapy with HES improvement of hearing was observed in 75% of patients, in 62% improvement of hearing persisted still at the end of the observation period (7 months post infusionem). Light and electron microscopic assessment of human skin biopsies of one patient after treatment with HES showed storage of HES especially within dermal macrophages. Pathogenetically a pathway independent of histamin seems responsible for the induction of pruritus. Accordingly, classic antihistaminic drugs had no therapeutic effect in our patients. Dextran is used as an alternative to hydroxyethyl starch. In contrast to HES, the often mentioned higher incidence of severe anaphylactic reactions due to dextran has dramatically decreased with hapten inhibition (after preinjection of monovalent haptendextran Promit(R)). Therefore, dextran is considered the best alternative to HES for therapy of sudden hearing loss.