Objectives The purpose of this study is to investigate the hyper-responsiveness of cervical vestibular-evoked myogenic potential (cVEMP) in patients with Meniere disease (MD), and to compare the result of cVEMP between probable and definite MD group.
Methods A total of 110 patients satisfied with probable MD and definite MD criteria, which is recently formulated by the Classification Committee of the Bárány Society, were included. An interpeak amplitude and interaural amplitude difference (IAD) ratio of both ears was measured. The abnormal response of ipsi-lesional cVEMP was categorized into 2 groups; hyper-response and hypo-response. Chi-square test and Mann-Whitney U-test were used for statistical analysis.
Results In the probable MD and definite MD group, the mean IAD was 25.24%±17.79% and 53.82%±34.98%, respectively (p<0.01). The abnormal response of cVEMP at the affected ear was more frequent in the definite MD group, compared to the probable MD group (32/40 vs. 13/36, p<0.01). However, hyper-response was more frequently observed in the patients with probable MD, compared to the patients with definite MD (13/36 vs. 3/40, p<0.01).
Conclusion Hyper-response of cVEMP was more frequently observed in the early probable MD patients. It might be an early sign of MD, related with the saccular hydrops, which can help the early detection and treatment.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Superior Semicircular Canal Dehiscence Syndrome Manifested as Menière’s Disease: A Case Report Byeong Jin Kim, Yun Na Yang, Chan Mi Lee, Eun Jung Lee Research in Vestibular Science.2021; 20(3): 108. CrossRef
Characteristics of Nystagmus during Attack of Vestibular Migraine Soyeon Yoon, Mi Joo Kim, Minbum Kim Research in Vestibular Science.2019; 18(2): 38. CrossRef
Background and Objectives: The goal of this study was to compare the outcome between cervical vestibular-evoked myogenic potential (cVEMP) and ocular VEMP (oVEMP) in the patients with definite vestibular dysfunction. Also, the subjective discomfort level was compared between cVEMP, classic oVEMP and head positioned oVEMP (a new method designed by the authors). Materials and Methods: Eighteen patients with dizziness associated with unilateral vestibular hypofunction were included in this study. Vestibular neuritis, Ramsay-hunt syndrome and sudden sensorineural hearing loss with vertigo were included in unilateral vestibular hypofunction disease. cVEMP, classic oVEMP, and head positioned oVEMP were assessed and compared. To compare the subjective discomfort during the tests, visual analogue scale on discomfort was checked. Results: There was a discrepancy between the cVEMP and classic oVEMP in 31.3% of the cases. The classic oVEMP were associated with more discomfort than the cVEMP. But, there was no difference between the classic and head positioned oVEMP. Conclusion: Since a substantial discrepancy was identified between the cVEMP and oVEMP, the pathways involved in cVEMP and oVEMP are likely different even with the same air conduction tone stimuli. The head positioned oVEMP may be an alternative to the classic oVEMP which has similar results and subjective discomfort levels.