[A clinical analysis of 27 cases of simultaneous bilateral sudden sensorineural hearing loss]

Objective:To compare the clinical characteristics and therapeutic effects between simultaneous bilateral sudden sensorineural hearing loss（Si-BSSHL） and unilateral sudden sensorineural hearing loss（USSHL）. Method:The clinical data of 27 cases of Si-BSSHL were retrospectively analyzed, including the characteristics of the disease, clinical manifestations, audiological examination, hematological examination, and therapeutic effect, and compared with those of 139 cases of USSHL. Result:There was a statistically significant difference in the age（65.85±9.17 vs 56.95±13.18, P<0.01） and no significant difference in sex ratio（P>0.05） between the two groups. The proportion of Si-BSSHL patients with vertigo, ear fullness, hypertension, diabetes, coronary heart disease and stroke had no statistical difference compared with those of USSHL（P>0.05）, the proportion of patients with tinnitus in Si-BSSHL group was significantly lower than that in USSHL group（P<0.05）. The distribution of hearing loss degree and the type of audiometry in Si-BSSHL group were significantly different from those in USSHL group, PTA before treatment and the proportion of profound hearing loss in Si-BSSHL group was significantly lower than that in USSHL group（P<0.05）, descending audiometry type was more common in Si-BSSHL group compared to USSHL（P<0.01）. Fibrinogen in Si-BSSHL group was significantly higher than that in USSHL group（P<0.05）. No significant difference was found between the two groups with respect to mean platelet volume, blood lipid and folic acid（P>0.05）. The total treatment effective rate in Si-BSSHL group was 44.44%, while that in USSHL group was 41.73%, there was no significant difference between the two groups（P>0.05）. Conclusion:Si-BSSHL has a female preponderance and tends to occur in advanced age in our cohort. Compared to USSHL patients, Si-BSSHL patients have less profound hearing loss and more descending audiograms, and the proportion of patients with extremely severe deafness is relatively small. There is no significant difference in the therapeutic effect between the two groups.