Efficacy and Safety of the Cinnarizine/Dimenhydrinate Combination versus Betahistine in the Treatment of Vertigo: A Systematic Literature Review.

David Martín-Enguix, Niceto Gómez Gabaldón, Francisco J Amaro-Gahete
{"title":"Efficacy and Safety of the Cinnarizine/Dimenhydrinate Combination versus Betahistine in the Treatment of Vertigo: A Systematic Literature Review.","authors":"David Martín-Enguix, Niceto Gómez Gabaldón, Francisco J Amaro-Gahete","doi":"10.1016/j.otoeng.2025.512274","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Vertigo is a frequent reason for medical consultation and may result from a wide range of aetiologies. Betahistine and the fixed low-dose combination of cinnarizine 20 mg and dimenhydrinate 40 mg are commonly used therapeutic options, each with distinct antivertigo profiles. This systematic review, conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, aims to compare the efficacy and safety of these two treatments in patients with vertigo of various origins. A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov, with no restrictions on language or publication date. Eligible studies included clinical trials and meta-analyses comparing the fixed low-dose combination (20 mg/40 mg) versus betahistine (12 or 16 mg), assessing efficacy through the Mean Vertigo Score (MVS) and safety based on the incidence of adverse events (AEs). The RoB 2 and ROBIS tools were used to evaluate the risk of bias. A total of nine studies were identified (six clinical trials and three meta-analyses). In five of the six clinical trials, the fixed low-dose combination significantly reduced MVS compared with betahistine at weeks 1 and/or 4 (p < 0.05); these findings were corroborated by the three meta-analyses. Regarding safety, both treatments were well tolerated, with no serious AEs reported and a generally lower incidence observed in the fixed low-dose combination group. Overall, the fixed low-dose combination demonstrated superior clinical efficacy from the first week of treatment, along with a more favourable tolerability and safety profile. These results support its preferential use in the management of acute vestibular syndrome.</p>","PeriodicalId":93855,"journal":{"name":"Acta otorrinolaringologica espanola","volume":" ","pages":"512274"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta otorrinolaringologica espanola","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otoeng.2025.512274","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Vertigo is a frequent reason for medical consultation and may result from a wide range of aetiologies. Betahistine and the fixed low-dose combination of cinnarizine 20 mg and dimenhydrinate 40 mg are commonly used therapeutic options, each with distinct antivertigo profiles. This systematic review, conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, aims to compare the efficacy and safety of these two treatments in patients with vertigo of various origins. A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov, with no restrictions on language or publication date. Eligible studies included clinical trials and meta-analyses comparing the fixed low-dose combination (20 mg/40 mg) versus betahistine (12 or 16 mg), assessing efficacy through the Mean Vertigo Score (MVS) and safety based on the incidence of adverse events (AEs). The RoB 2 and ROBIS tools were used to evaluate the risk of bias. A total of nine studies were identified (six clinical trials and three meta-analyses). In five of the six clinical trials, the fixed low-dose combination significantly reduced MVS compared with betahistine at weeks 1 and/or 4 (p < 0.05); these findings were corroborated by the three meta-analyses. Regarding safety, both treatments were well tolerated, with no serious AEs reported and a generally lower incidence observed in the fixed low-dose combination group. Overall, the fixed low-dose combination demonstrated superior clinical efficacy from the first week of treatment, along with a more favourable tolerability and safety profile. These results support its preferential use in the management of acute vestibular syndrome.

肉桂利嗪/苯海明联合与倍他司汀治疗眩晕的疗效和安全性:系统文献综述。
眩晕是就诊的常见原因,可能由多种病因引起。倍他司汀和固定的低剂量组合肉桂利嗪20毫克和苯海明40毫克是常用的治疗选择,每一种都有不同的抗眩晕作用。根据PRISMA指南进行的这项系统评价,旨在比较这两种治疗方法在不同来源的眩晕患者中的疗效和安全性。在PubMed、Cochrane Library、b谷歌Scholar和ClinicalTrials.gov上进行了全面的搜索,没有语言和出版日期的限制。符合条件的研究包括临床试验和荟萃分析,比较固定低剂量组合(20 mg/40 mg)与倍他司汀(12或16 mg),通过平均眩晕评分(MVS)评估疗效,以及基于不良事件发生率(ae)的安全性。使用rob2和ROBIS工具评估偏倚风险。总共确定了9项研究(6项临床试验和3项荟萃分析)。在6项临床试验中的5项中,与倍他司汀相比,固定低剂量组合在第1周和/或第4周显著降低了MVS (p
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信