-
Something wrong with this record ?
Ginkgo biloba extract EGb 761® versus pentoxifylline in chronic tinnitus: a randomized, double-blind clinical trial
K. Procházková, I. Šejna, J. Skutil, A. Hahn,
Language English Country Netherlands
Document type Comparative Study, Journal Article, Randomized Controlled Trial
NLK
ProQuest Central
from 2011-02-01 to 1 year ago
Medline Complete (EBSCOhost)
from 2011-02-01 to 1 year ago
Nursing & Allied Health Database (ProQuest)
from 2011-02-01 to 1 year ago
Health & Medicine (ProQuest)
from 2011-02-01 to 1 year ago
- MeSH
- Chronic Disease MeSH
- Adult MeSH
- Double-Blind Method MeSH
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Pentoxifylline adverse effects therapeutic use MeSH
- Psychiatric Status Rating Scales MeSH
- Plant Extracts adverse effects therapeutic use MeSH
- Aged MeSH
- Tinnitus drug therapy physiopathology psychology MeSH
- Vasodilator Agents adverse effects therapeutic use MeSH
- Treatment Outcome MeSH
- Check Tag
- Adult MeSH
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Male MeSH
- Aged MeSH
- Female MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Randomized Controlled Trial MeSH
- Comparative Study MeSH
- Geographicals
- Czech Republic MeSH
Background Ginkgo biloba extract EGb 761® and pentoxifylline are frequently prescribed for the treatment of tinnitus. Objective To compare the treatment effects of Ginkgo biloba extract EGb 761R and pentoxifylline. Setting The study was performed at Department of Otorhinolaryngology of University Hospital Královské Vinohrady and 3rd Medical Faculty, Charles University in Prague. Method Patients with sub-chronic or chronic tinnitus were enrolled in double-blind trial and randomized to receive 120 mg EGb 761® or 600 mg pentoxifylline, each twice a day and in double-dummy fashion over a 12-week period. Main outcome measure changes in 11-Point Box Scales for tinnitus loudness and annoyance, the abridged Tinnitus Questionnaire (Mini-TQ), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS). Results Full analysis set for efficacy analysis comprised 197 patients (EGb 761®, 99; pentoxifylline 98). For both treatment groups, significant improvements were observed in the Mini-TQ, the 11-Point Box Scales for tinnitus loudness and annoyance, the HADS anxiety score and the SDS. There was no relevant difference with regard to tinnitus-related outcomes between the two treatment groups. 20 adverse events were documented in EGb 761® group and 36 adverse events were reported for pentoxifylline group. No serious adverse event was reported during the study. Conclusion EGb 761® and pentoxifylline were similarly effective in reducing the loudness and annoyance of tinnitus as well as overall suffering of the patients. The incidence of adverse events was lower in the EGb 761® group.
References provided by Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc19012637
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20220203082356.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 190405s2018 ne f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1007/s11096-018-0654-4 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)29855986
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a ne
- 100 1_
- $a Procházková, Klára $u Department of Otorhinolaryngology, University Hospital Kralovske Vinohrady, Šrobárova 50, 10034, Prague, Czech Republic. klara.prochazkova@gmail.com. Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic. klara.prochazkova@gmail.com.
- 245 10
- $a Ginkgo biloba extract EGb 761® versus pentoxifylline in chronic tinnitus: a randomized, double-blind clinical trial / $c K. Procházková, I. Šejna, J. Skutil, A. Hahn,
- 520 9_
- $a Background Ginkgo biloba extract EGb 761® and pentoxifylline are frequently prescribed for the treatment of tinnitus. Objective To compare the treatment effects of Ginkgo biloba extract EGb 761R and pentoxifylline. Setting The study was performed at Department of Otorhinolaryngology of University Hospital Královské Vinohrady and 3rd Medical Faculty, Charles University in Prague. Method Patients with sub-chronic or chronic tinnitus were enrolled in double-blind trial and randomized to receive 120 mg EGb 761® or 600 mg pentoxifylline, each twice a day and in double-dummy fashion over a 12-week period. Main outcome measure changes in 11-Point Box Scales for tinnitus loudness and annoyance, the abridged Tinnitus Questionnaire (Mini-TQ), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS). Results Full analysis set for efficacy analysis comprised 197 patients (EGb 761®, 99; pentoxifylline 98). For both treatment groups, significant improvements were observed in the Mini-TQ, the 11-Point Box Scales for tinnitus loudness and annoyance, the HADS anxiety score and the SDS. There was no relevant difference with regard to tinnitus-related outcomes between the two treatment groups. 20 adverse events were documented in EGb 761® group and 36 adverse events were reported for pentoxifylline group. No serious adverse event was reported during the study. Conclusion EGb 761® and pentoxifylline were similarly effective in reducing the loudness and annoyance of tinnitus as well as overall suffering of the patients. The incidence of adverse events was lower in the EGb 761® group.
- 650 _2
- $a dospělí $7 D000328
- 650 _2
- $a senioři $7 D000368
- 650 _2
- $a chronická nemoc $7 D002908
- 650 _2
- $a dvojitá slepá metoda $7 D004311
- 650 _2
- $a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
- 650 _2
- $a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
- 650 _2
- $a pentoxifylin $x škodlivé účinky $x terapeutické užití $7 D010431
- 650 _2
- $a rostlinné extrakty $x škodlivé účinky $x terapeutické užití $7 D010936
- 650 _2
- $a psychiatrické posuzovací škály $7 D011569
- 650 _2
- $a tinnitus $x farmakoterapie $x patofyziologie $x psychologie $7 D014012
- 650 _2
- $a výsledek terapie $7 D016896
- 650 _2
- $a vazodilatancia $x škodlivé účinky $x terapeutické užití $7 D014665
- 651 _2
- $a Česká republika $7 D018153
- 655 _2
- $a srovnávací studie $7 D003160
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 655 _2
- $a randomizované kontrolované studie $7 D016449
- 700 1_
- $a Šejna, Ivan $u Department of Otorhinolaryngology, University Hospital Kralovske Vinohrady, Šrobárova 50, 10034, Prague, Czech Republic. Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
- 700 1_
- $a Skutil, Jan $u Department of Otorhinolaryngology, University Hospital Kralovske Vinohrady, Šrobárova 50, 10034, Prague, Czech Republic. Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
- 700 1_
- $a Hahn, Aleš, $u Department of Otorhinolaryngology, University Hospital Kralovske Vinohrady, Šrobárova 50, 10034, Prague, Czech Republic. Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic. $d 1947-2020 $7 nlk19990073180
- 773 0_
- $w MED00180241 $t International journal of clinical pharmacy $x 2210-7711 $g Roč. 40, č. 5 (2018), s. 1335-1341
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29855986 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20190405 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20220203082350 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 1391947 $s 1050942
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2018 $b 40 $c 5 $d 1335-1341 $e 20180601 $i 2210-7711 $m International journal of clinical pharmacy $n Int J Clin Pharm $x MED00180241
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20190405