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

Search MEDLINE/PubMed


  • Title: Evaluating vertebrobasilar insufficiency and Meniere's disease: Insights from cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potential and video head impulse test.
    Author: Surmeli M, Surmeli R, Yalcin D, Yilmaz Sahin AA, Cirik Adnan A, Gunay G, Kulali F.
    Journal: Ideggyogy Sz; 2024 Sep 30; 77(9-10):349-356. PubMed ID: 39352256.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: <p>This prospective study aimed to investigate diffe-rences in video head impulse test (vHIT) and&nbsp;cervical vestibular evoked myogenic poten-tial (cVEMP) findings between patients with vertebrobasilar insufficiency (VBI) and Meniere&rsquo;s disease (MD) who experience episodic vertigo attacks.</p>. METHODS: <p>A total of 27 patients with VBI and 37 patients with MD were enrolled into the study in a tertiary referral center. Inclusion criteria consisted of patients with a minimum of two previous vertigo attacks, unaccompanied by any neurological symptoms during an attack. All patients underwent horizontal canal h-vHIT and c-VEMP assessments following pure sound audiometric examinations. First, vHIT and cVEMP results for low and high flow sides in VBI patients were analyzed. Subsequently, data from the low-flow side in VBI patients and the affected side in MD patients were compared.</p>. RESULTS: <p>The mean vHIT values for low and high-flow volume sides in VBI patients were 0.68 and 0.88, respectively. In MD patients, mean vHIT values for affected and healthy sides were measured as 0.77 and 0.87, respectively. Abnormal results were observed in 66.7% of VBI patients and 51.4% of MD patients, with no statistically significant difference between the findings (p&gt; 0.05). Upon examining the affected side, c-VEMP responses were absent in 41% of MD patients and 48% of VBI patients, with no statistically significant difference between the groups (p&gt; 0.05).</p>. CONCLUSION: <p>vHIT and cVEMP assessments can be utilized as supplementary tools to radiologic investigations for the clinical diagnosis and follow-up of VBI. However, no significant differences were observed between vHIT and cVEMP findings in patients with MD and VBI.</p>. BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: <p>Ennek a prospektív vizsg&aacute;latnak a c&eacute;lja a vide&oacute;s fejimpulzusteszt (vHIT) &eacute;s a cervicalis vestibularis kiv&aacute;ltott myogen potenci&aacute;l- (cVEMP-) eredm&eacute;nyek k&uuml;l&ouml;nbs&eacute;geinek vizsg&aacute;lata volt olyan vertebrobasilaris el&eacute;gtelens&eacute;gben (VBI) &eacute;s Meniere-k&oacute;rban (MD) szenvedő betegek k&ouml;z&ouml;tt, akikn&eacute;l epizodikus sz&eacute;d&uuml;l&eacute;ses rohamok jelentkeznek.</p>. METHODS: <p>A vizsg&aacute;latba &ouml;sszesen 27 VBI- beteget &eacute;s 37 MD-beteget vontunk be egy tercier szakorvosi k&ouml;zpontban. A felv&eacute;teli krit&eacute;riumokat akkor teljesített&eacute;k a betegek,<br>ha legal&aacute;bb k&eacute;t kor&aacute;bbi sz&eacute;d&uuml;l&eacute;ses rohamuk volt, &eacute;s a roham alatt nem volt semmilyen neurol&oacute;giai t&uuml;net&uuml;k. Minden betegn&eacute;l a tiszta hang audiometriai vizsg&aacute;latokat k&ouml;vetően horizont&aacute;lis csatorn&aacute;s (h)-vHIT- &eacute;s cVEMP-&eacute;rt&eacute;kel&eacute;st v&eacute;gezt&uuml;nk. Elősz&ouml;r a vHIT- &eacute;s a cVEMP-eredm&eacute;nyeket elemezt&uuml;k a VBI-bete-gek alacsony &eacute;s magas &aacute;raml&aacute;si oldal&aacute;ra vonatkoz&oacute;an. Ezt k&ouml;vetően a VBI-betegek alacsony &aacute;raml&aacute;si oldal&aacute;nak &eacute;s az MD-bete-gek &eacute;rintett oldal&aacute;nak adatait hasonlítottuk &ouml;ssze.</p>. RESULTS: <p>Az &aacute;tlagos vHIT-&eacute;rt&eacute;k a VBI-betegek alacsony &eacute;s magas &aacute;raml&aacute;si t&eacute;r-fogat&uacute; oldalain 0,68, illetve 0,88 volt. Az MD- betegekn&eacute;l az &eacute;rintett &eacute;s az eg&eacute;szs&eacute;ges oldal &aacute;tlagos vHIT-&eacute;rt&eacute;kei 0,77 &eacute;s 0,87 voltak. A VBI-betegek 66,7%-&aacute;n&aacute;l &eacute;s az MD-betegek 51,4%-&aacute;n&aacute;l rendellenes eredm&eacute;nyeket figyelt&uuml;nk meg, &eacute;s az eredm&eacute;nyek k&ouml;z&ouml;tt nem volt statisztikailag szignifik&aacute;ns k&uuml;l&ouml;nbs&eacute;g (p &gt; 0,05). Az &eacute;rintett oldal vizsg&aacute;latakor a cVEMP-v&aacute;laszok az MD-betegek 41%-&aacute;n&aacute;l &eacute;s a VBI-betegek 48%-&aacute;n&aacute;l hi&aacute;nyoztak, a csoportok k&ouml;z&ouml;tt nem volt statisztikailag szignifik&aacute;ns k&uuml;l&ouml;nbs&eacute;g (p &gt; 0,05).</p>. CONCLUSION: <p>A vHIT- &eacute;s a cVEMP-&eacute;rt&eacute;-kel&eacute;sek a radiol&oacute;giai vizsg&aacute;latokat kieg&eacute;szítő eszk&ouml;zk&eacute;nt haszn&aacute;lhat&oacute;k a VBI klinikai diagn&oacute;zis&aacute;ban &eacute;s ut&aacute;nk&ouml;vet&eacute;s&eacute;ben. Mindazon&aacute;ltal, a vHIT- &eacute;s a cVEMP-leletek k&ouml;z&ouml;tt nem &eacute;szlelt&uuml;nk szignifik&aacute;ns k&uuml;l&ouml;nbs&eacute;geket az MD- &eacute;s a VBI-betegekn&eacute;l.</p>.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]