Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T16:39:15.288Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Does pregnancy have an influence on otosclerosis?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 November 2021

C Fabbris*
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery, Integrated University Hospital of Verona, Verona, Italy
G Molteni
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery, Integrated University Hospital of Verona, Verona, Italy
N Tommasi
Affiliation:
Interdepartmental Centre of Economical Documentation, University of Verona, Verona, Italy
D Marchioni
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery, Integrated University Hospital of Verona, Verona, Italy
*
Author for correspondence: Dr C Fabbris, Department of Otolaryngology, University Hospital of Verona, Piazzale Aristide Stefani 1, Verona37126, Italy E-mail: [email protected] Fax: +39 045 812 2070

Abstract

Objective

Otosclerosis affects women twice as often as men, especially during fertile age. A role of female hormones has been claimed, but controversy still exists regarding the influence of pregnancy. The purpose of this research was to analyse the role of pregnancy on the course of otosclerosis.

Method

PubMed was searched in May 2019 using the terms ‘otosclerosis AND pregnancy’, ‘otosclerosis AND pregnant’, ‘otosclerosis AND parous’, ‘otosclerosis AND parity’, and ‘otosclerosis AND puerperium’. Age at diagnosis, number of pregnancies and the temporal relationship of the disease with childbearing were considered.

Results

From 65 articles, 11 were chosen for review. They described 2323 women affected by otosclerosis: 1805 had at least 1 pregnancy, while 518 did not. During childbearing, otosclerosis began in 1 per cent of pregnant women, worsened in 21 per cent and worsened during puerperium in 4 per cent. Often, the authors reported hearing change with pregnancy without details, so a further group has been considered composed of women belonging to any of the groups just mentioned or to another group of women not further characterised. Overall, hearing change occurred during pregnancy in 44 per cent. A statistically significant correlation emerged between hearing change and number of pregnancies (p = 0.003).

Conclusion

Because of wide data heterogeneity and the difficulty in analysing a single factor, absolute statements could not be formulated. According to this review, pregnancy seems to have a worsening effect on the course of otosclerosis.

Type
Review Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of J.L.O. (1984) LIMITED.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Dr C Fabbris takes responsibility for the integrity of the content of the paper

References

Rudic, M, Keogh, I, Wagner, R, Wilkinson, E, Kiros, N, Ferrary, E et al. The pathophysiology of otosclerosis: review of current research. Hear Res 2015;330:51–6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kameswaran, S, Kumar, PV, Jeyapaul, JI, Manoharan, S. Audiological and haematological studies on the Todas of Nilgiris. J Laryngol Otol 1976;90:325–33CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Molteni, G, Fabbris, C, Molinari, G, Alicandri-Ciufelli, M, Presutti, L, Paltrinieri, D et al. Correlation between pre-operative CT findings and intra-operative features in pediatric cholesteatoma: a retrospective study on 26 patients. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2019;276:2449–6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thys, M, Van Camp, G. Genetics of otosclerosis. Otol Neurotol 2009;30:1021–32CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Podoshin, L, Gertner, R, Fradis, M, Feiglin, H, Eibschitz, I, Sharf, M et al. Oral contraceptive pills and clinical otosclerosis. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1978;15:554–5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gristwood, RE, Venables, WN. Pregnancy and otosclerosis. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 1983;8:205–10CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmidt, E. Erblichkeit und graviditat bei der otosklerose. Arch Ohr Nas Kehlk Heilk 1933;136:188210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cawthorne, T. Otosclerosis. J Laryngol Otol 1955;69:437–56CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Larsson, A. Otosclerosis. A genetic and clinical study. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl 1960;154:186Google ScholarPubMed
Morrison, AW. Genetic factors in otosclerosis. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 1967;41:202–37Google ScholarPubMed
Gapany-Gapanavicius, B. The incidence of otosclerosis in the general population. Isr J Med Sci 1975;11:465–8Google ScholarPubMed
Pearson, E. The effect of pregnancy on otosclerosis. Ann West Med Surg 1951;5:477–82Google ScholarPubMed
Hall, JG. Otosclerosis in Norway, a geographical and genetical study. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl 1974;324:120Google ScholarPubMed
Lippy, WH, Berenholz, LP, Schuring, AG, Burkey, JM. Does pregnancy affect otosclerosis? Laryngoscope 2005;115:1833–6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schrauwen, I. The etiology of otosclerosis: a combination of genes and environment. Laryngoscope 2010;120:1195–202CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Horner, KC. The effect of sex hormones on bone metabolism of the otic capsule – an overview. Hear Res 2009;252:5660CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markou, K, Goudakos, J. An overview of the etiology of otosclerosis. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2009;266:2535CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liberati, A, Altman, DG, Tetzlaff, J, Mulrow, C, Gøtzsche, PC, Ioannidis, JP et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 2009;151:W6594CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bordini, B, Rosenfeld, RL. Normal pubertal development: part II: clinical aspects of puberty. Pediatr Rev 2011;32:281–92CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gold, EB, Crawford, SL, Avis, NE, Crandall, CJ, Matthews, KA, Waetjen, LE et al. Factors related to age at natural menopause: longitudinal analyses from SWAN. Am J Epidemiol 2013;178:7083CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McKenna, MJ, Mills, BG, Galey, FR, Linthicum, FH Jr. Filamentous structures morphologically similar to viral nucleocapsids in otosclerotic lesions in two patients. Am J Otol 1986;7:25–8Google ScholarPubMed
Arnold, W, Friedmann, I. Detection of measles and rubella-specific antigens in the endochondral ossification zone in otosclerosis. Laryngol Rhinol Otol (Stuttg) 1987;66:167–71CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roald, B, Størvold, G, Mair, IW, Mjøen, S. Respiratory tract viruses in otosclerotic lesions. An immunohistochemical study. Acta Otolaryngol 1992;112:334–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yoo, TJ, Stuart, JM, Kang, AH, Townes, AS, Tomoda, K, Dixit, S. Type II collagen autoimmunity in otosclerosis and Meniere's Disease. Science 1982;217:1153–5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sølvsten Sørensen, M, Nielsen, LP, Bretlau, P, Jørgensen, MB. The role of type II collagen autoimmunity in otosclerosis revisited. Acta Otolaryngol 1988;105:242–7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Menger, DJ, Tange, RA. The aetiology of otosclerosis: a review of the literature. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 2003;28:112–20CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chobaut, JC, Bertrand, D, Raffoux, C, Wayoff, M. HLA antigens in otosclerosis. Am J Otol 1982;3:241–2Google ScholarPubMed
Pedersen, U, Madsen, M, Lamm, LU, Elbrønd, O. HLA-A, -B, -C antigens in otosclerosis. J Laryngol Otol 1983;97:1095–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lolov, SR, Edrev, GE, Kyurkchiev, SD, Kehayov, IR. Elevated autoantibodies in sera from otosclerotic patients are related to the disease duration. Acta Otolaryngol 1998;118:375–80Google Scholar
Grayeli, AB, Sterkers, O, Roulleau, P, Elbaz, P, Ferrary, E, Silve, C. Parathyroid hormone-parathyroid hormone-related peptide receptor expression and function in otosclerosis. Am J Physiol 1999;277:E1005–12Google ScholarPubMed
Vessey, M, Painter, R. Oral contraception and ear disease: findings in a large cohort study. Contraception 2001;63:61–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, HW. Effect of pregnancy on otosclerosis. Arch Otolaryngol 1948;48:159–70CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walsh, TE. The effect of pregnancy on the deafness due to otosclerosis. J Am Med Assoc 1954a;154:1407–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walsh, TE. The effect of pregnancy on the deafness of otosclerosis. Trans Am Acad Ophthalmol Otolaryngol 1954b;58:420–6Google Scholar
Elbrond, O, Jensen, KJ. Otosclerosis and pregnancy: a study of the influence of pregnancy on the hearing threshold before and after stapedectomy. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 1979;4:259–66CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marchese, MR, Conti, G, Cianfrone, F, Scorpecci, A, Fetoni, AR, Paludetti, G. Predictive role of audiological and clinical features for functional results after stapedotomy. Audiol Neurootol 2009;14:279–85CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rekha, S, Ramalingam, R, Parani, M. Pedigree analysis and audiological investigations of otosclerosis: an extended family based study. J Audiol Otol 2018;22:223–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Crompton, M, Cadge, BA, Ziff, JL, Mowat, AJ, Nash, R, Lavy, JA et al. The epidemiology of otosclerosis in a British cohort. Otol Neurotol 2019;40:2230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Booth, JB. Otosclerosis. Practitioner 1978;221:710–5Google ScholarPubMed
Hansen, L, Sobol, SM, Abelson, TI. Otolaryngologic manifestations of pregnancy. J Fam Pract 1986;23:151–5Google ScholarPubMed
Panossian, A, Wikman, G. Pharmacology of Schisandra chinensis Bail.: an overview of Russian research and uses in medicine. J Ethnopharmacol 2008;118:183212CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liao, S, Lu, S, Li, G, Chen, R. Increased maternal serum placental growth hormone variant in pregnancies complicated by otosclerosis. Clin Otolaryngol 2019;44:757–61CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shiny Sherlie, V, Varghese, A. ENT Changes of pregnancy and its management. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2014;66:69CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Terrin, N, Schmid, CH, Lau, J, Olkin, I. Adjusting for publication bias in the presence of heterogeneity. Stat Med 2003;22:2113–26CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ioannidis, JP. Differentiating biases from genuine heterogeneity: distinguishing artefactual from substantive effects. In: Rothstein, HR, Sutton, AJ, Borenstein, M, eds. Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis: Prevention, Assessment and Adjustments. Sussex: John Wiley & Sons, 2005;287302Google Scholar