These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Particle repositioning maneuver versus Brandt-Daroff exercise for treatment of unilateral idiopathic BPPV of the posterior semicircular canal: a randomized prospective clinical trial with short- and long-term outcome.
    Author: Amor-Dorado JC, Barreira-Fernández MP, Aran-Gonzalez I, Casariego-Vales E, Llorca J, González-Gay MA.
    Journal: Otol Neurotol; 2012 Oct; 33(8):1401-7. PubMed ID: 22935812.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcome and probability of recurrence in a series of patients with unilateral idiopathic benign paroxysmal positional vertigo of the posterior canal (PC-BPPV) that were randomly treated by Brandt-Daroff exercise (B-D exercise) or by particle repositioning maneuver (PRM). STUDY DESIGN: Randomized prospective clinical trial. SETTING: Tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: Patients were included in this study if they complained of vertigo and had been diagnosed as having unilateral idiopathic PC-BPPV for at least 1 week before Dix-Hallpike maneuver (DHM), remained for 30 days in the randomly assigned treatment, and had at least 48 months' follow-up. INTERVENTION: Forty-one patients were treated with a single PRM and 40 patients by B-D exercise. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Resolution of benign paroxysmal positional nystagmus on the DHM. The probability of recurrence was also studied. RESULTS: At Day 7, DHM was negative in 80.5% of the PRM-treated patients and in 25% of those treated by B-D exercise (p < 0.001). At Month 1, the differences between both treatment groups remained statistically significant (92.7% in PRM versus 42.5% in the B-D exercise had a negative DHM; p < 0.001). The variable that influenced that DHM became negative was the PRM (RR = 4.8; 95% confidence interval, 2.5-9.2; p < 0.001). The number of recurrences in PRM and B-D exercise were 0.56 ± 0.8 and 0.48 ± 0.8, respectively (p = 0.48). The recurrence rate at 48 months was 35.5% (15/41) in B-D exercise and 36.6% (9/31) in the PRM group (p = 0.62). Although the time interval until the first recurrence was similar (p = 0.44), patients included in the PRM group showed a significantly longer time interval between the first and second recurrence (p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: PRM is more effective treatment and as safe as B-D exercise in the short term for unilateral and idiopathic PC-BPPV, and although it does not reduce the probability of recurrence in the 4-year follow-up period compared with B-D exercise, it may delay the second recurrence's onset in those patients who had already experienced a single recurrence. Our study supports the use of PRM as the treatment of choice in unilateral and idiopathic PC-BPPV, although exercise may be also considered as an alternative treatment in selected cases.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]