Characterizing the Age and Stimulus Frequency Interaction for Ocular Vestibular-Evoked Myogenic Potentials

Singh, Niraj Kumar; Firdose, Husna

doi:10.1097/aud.0000000000000482

Cited by 17 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previously, Piker et al 10 demonstrated that age can have a significant effect on the tuning of VEMP, and middle-aged individuals have a shift in their best frequencies for VEMP. On similar grounds, Singh et al 15 have also reported that there is significant interaction between age and frequency tuning for oVEMP. In our study, we recruited participants aged between 19 and 59 years.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 72%

Effect of Stimulus Frequency on Air-Conducted Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potentials

Han

et al. 2021

Int Adv Otol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The aim of this study is to explore the effect of stimulus frequency on air-conducted cervical and ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potential (cVEMP and oVEMP) in healthy subjects. Methods: The study included 45 healthy subjects who underwent the VEMP tests. Different stimulus frequencies (250-1500 Hz) were used for air-conducted cVEMP and oVEMP. Results: In cVEMP, P1 and N1 latencies were significantly affected by different frequencies ( P < .01). The amplitude at 500 Hz was significantly larger than those at other frequencies ( P < .01).There was no significant main effect of frequency on asymmetry ratio (AR) ( P > .05). In oVEMP, there was a tendency for the N1 and P1 latencies to decrease from 250 Hz to 1500 Hz ( P < .01). The amplitudes at 500 Hz and 1000 Hz were significantly larger than the amplitudes at 250 Hz and 1500 Hz ( P < .01).There was no significant main effect of frequency on AR ( P > .05). Conclusion: The optimal stimulus frequency of the cVEMP is 500 Hz and for the oVEMP is 500Hz or 1000Hz. Due to the absence of impact of stimulus frequency, AR is the best parameter of VEMP for clinical use.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 72%

Effect of Stimulus Frequency on Air-Conducted Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potentials

Han

et al. 2021

Int Adv Otol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One possible explanation for these missing oVEMPs is subject age. The oVEMP response rate decreases with age and many healthy subjects over age 60 may not have an observable oVEMP response (37,38).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potential (VEMP) Testing for Diagnosis of Superior Semicircular Canal Dehiscence

Noij

Rauch

2020

Front. Neurol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Superior semicircular canal dehiscence is a bony defect of the superior semicircular canal, which can lead to a variety of auditory and vestibular symptoms. The diagnosis of superior semicircular canal dehiscence (SCD) can be challenging, time consuming, and costly. The clinical presentation of SCD patients resembles that of other otologic disease, necessitating objective diagnostics. Although temporal bone CT imaging provides excellent sensitivity for SCD detection, it lacks specificity. Because the treatment of SCD is surgical, it is crucial to use a highly specific test to confirm the diagnosis and avoid false positives and subsequent unnecessary surgery. This review provides an update on recent improvements in vestibular evoked myogenic potential (VEMP) testing for SCD diagnosis. Combining audiometric and conventional cervical VEMP results improves SCD diagnostic accuracy. High frequency VEMP testing is superior to all other methods described to date. It is highly specific for the detection of SCD and may be used to guide decision-making regarding the need for subsequent CT imaging. This algorithmic sequential use of testing can substantially reduce radiation exposure as well as cost associated with SCD diagnosis.

show abstract

“…3) (Park et al, 2010, Rosengren et al, 2011, Rodriguez et al, 2019). The consequence of this is that AC oVEMPs are more often absent than cVEMPs and are particularly sensitive to the effects of age (Piker et al, 2011, Piker et al, 2013, Piker et al, 2015, Rosengren et al, 2011, Singh and Firdose, 2018). This has a significant impact on the clinical utility of the AC oVEMP to detect vestibular loss, as responses can be absent in substantial numbers of healthy older adults.…”

Section: Which Stimulus To Use? Ac Versus Bcmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vestibular evoked myogenic potentials in practice: Methods, pitfalls and clinical applications

Rosengren

Colebatch

Young

et al. 2019

Clinical Neurophysiology Practice

212

208

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Characterizing the Age and Stimulus Frequency Interaction for Ocular Vestibular-Evoked Myogenic Potentials

Cited by 17 publications

References 52 publications

Effect of Stimulus Frequency on Air-Conducted Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potentials

Effect of Stimulus Frequency on Air-Conducted Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potentials

Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potential (VEMP) Testing for Diagnosis of Superior Semicircular Canal Dehiscence

Vestibular evoked myogenic potentials in practice: Methods, pitfalls and clinical applications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About