Kimberly Chan, Cheng Ma, Bao Y Sciscent, Andreacarola Urso, Neerav Goyal, Jessyka G Lighthall
{"title":"Emerging Medications in Facial Nerve Recovery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Kimberly Chan, Cheng Ma, Bao Y Sciscent, Andreacarola Urso, Neerav Goyal, Jessyka G Lighthall","doi":"10.1002/oto2.70275","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To systematically review the literature for medical therapies that promote facial nerve regeneration and recovery.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>PubMed/Medline, Embase, and SCOPUS databases were searched for English-language studies published from inception through May 2025.</p><p><strong>Review methods: </strong>Human studies evaluating the efficacy of medical therapy on facial nerve regeneration using validated facial nerve grading scales were included.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nine studies were included in qualitative analysis, and 6 were included in a meta-analysis. Treatments included nimodipine (n = 6), pentoxifylline (n = 1), co-enzyme Q10 (n = 1), and extracellular vesicles (n = 1). All studies used HB score, and recovery was defined as HB score ≤3. Recovery was observed in 94% (95% CI:[90%, 97%]) of patients treated with nimodipine and 84% (95% CI: [70%, 97%]) of control patients; this was not statistically significant (OR 2.26, 95% CI: [0.97, 5.26]). Nimodipine significantly decreased HB score by 1.66 (95% CI: [0.81, 2.52]) before and after treatment. Pentoxifylline and extracellular vesicles demonstrated some efficacy, while co-enzyme Q10 was not efficacious.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Nimodipine improved HB score but was not significantly associated with recovery to HB score ≤3 compared to controls. Pentoxifylline and extracellular vesicles may have some efficacy, but co-enzyme Q10 is not effective. Further research is required to uncover additional treatments.</p>","PeriodicalId":19697,"journal":{"name":"OTO Open","volume":"10 3","pages":"e70275"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13312993/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"OTO Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/oto2.70275","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: To systematically review the literature for medical therapies that promote facial nerve regeneration and recovery.
Data sources: PubMed/Medline, Embase, and SCOPUS databases were searched for English-language studies published from inception through May 2025.
Review methods: Human studies evaluating the efficacy of medical therapy on facial nerve regeneration using validated facial nerve grading scales were included.
Results: Nine studies were included in qualitative analysis, and 6 were included in a meta-analysis. Treatments included nimodipine (n = 6), pentoxifylline (n = 1), co-enzyme Q10 (n = 1), and extracellular vesicles (n = 1). All studies used HB score, and recovery was defined as HB score ≤3. Recovery was observed in 94% (95% CI:[90%, 97%]) of patients treated with nimodipine and 84% (95% CI: [70%, 97%]) of control patients; this was not statistically significant (OR 2.26, 95% CI: [0.97, 5.26]). Nimodipine significantly decreased HB score by 1.66 (95% CI: [0.81, 2.52]) before and after treatment. Pentoxifylline and extracellular vesicles demonstrated some efficacy, while co-enzyme Q10 was not efficacious.
Conclusion: Nimodipine improved HB score but was not significantly associated with recovery to HB score ≤3 compared to controls. Pentoxifylline and extracellular vesicles may have some efficacy, but co-enzyme Q10 is not effective. Further research is required to uncover additional treatments.