A Comparison of Two Recording Montages for Ocular Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potentials in Patients with Superior Canal Dehiscence Syndrome

Abstract

The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of the ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potential (oVEMP) using two electrode montages in patients with confirmed unilateral superior semicircular canal dehiscence syndrome (SCDS).This study evaluated oVEMP response characteristics measured using two different electrode montages from 12 unilateral SCDS ears and 36 age-matched control ears (age range = 23–66). The oVEMP responses were elicited using 500 Hz tone-burst air conduction stimuli presented at an intensity of 95 dB nHL and a rate of 5.1/sec. The two electrode montages used are described as an “infraorbital” montage and a “belly-tendon” montage.Balance function laboratory embedded in a large, tertiary care otology clinic.The belly-tendon electrode montage resulted in significantly larger amplitude responses than the infraorbital electrode montage for the ears with SCDS and the normal control ears. For both electrode montages the ear with SCDS exhibited a significantly larger amplitude response, ∼50% larger than the response amplitude from the normal control ear. The belly-tendon montage additionally produced larger median increases in amplitude compared with the infraorbital montage. Specifically, the median increase in oVEMP N1-P1 amplitudes using the belly-tendon montage was 39% greater in control ears, 76% greater in the SCDS ears, and 17% greater in the contralateral SCDS ears.The belly-tendon electrode montage yields significantly larger oVEMP amplitude responses for participants with SCDS and normal control participants.

Measurement of Ocular Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potentials: Nasion Reference Montage as an Alternative to the Clinical Standard Montage

“…Latencies: Equivocal Results Due to Numerous Factors of Influence Two significant differences for latencies could be assessed: montage S and montage N had significantly longer latencies for P1 compared with montage L. Previous results of comparable studies are equivocal in this respect. They either show shorter latencies for the belly-tendon montage or the latency differences were not significant (35,37,60). Reasons for these differences are numerous and difficult to differentiate as they represent a mix of modified measurement settings and confounding factors.…”

Usefulness of Cervical Vestibular-Evoked Myogenic Potentials for Diagnosing Patients With Superior Canal Dehiscence Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis

“…After excluding 607 duplicate articles, 408 articles were excluded due to the lack of a relevant of title and abstract. The full text of the remaining 27 articles was evaluated, and 18 studies were excluded due to the inclusion of other interventions or a lack of outcomes (1,(27)(28)(29)(30)(31)(32)(33)(34)(35)(36)(37)(38)(39)(40)(41)(42)(43). Consequently, nine studies with 721 participants were finally included in the metaanalysis.…”