Literature DB >> 19764171

Vestibular evoked myogenic potential (VEMP) testing: normative threshold response curves and effects of age.

Kristen L Janky1, Neil Shepard.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Vestibular evoked myogenic potential (VEMP) testing has gained increased interest in the diagnosis of a variety of vestibular etiologies. P13/N23 latency, amplitude and threshold response curves have been used to compare pathologic groups to normal controls. Appropriate characterization of these etiologies requires normative data across the frequency spectrum and age range.
PURPOSE: The objective of the current study was to test the hypothesis that significant changes in VEMP responses occur as a function of increased age across all test stimuli as well as characterize the VEMP threshold response curve across age. RESEARCH
DESIGN: This project incorporated a prospective study design using a sample of convenience. Openly recruited subjects were assigned to groups according to age. STUDY SAMPLE: Forty-six normal controls ranging between 20 and 76 years of age participated in the study. Participants were separated by decade into five age categories from 20 to 60 plus years. Normal participants were characterized by having normal hearing sensitivity, no history of neurologic or balance/dizziness involvement, and negative results on a direct office vestibular examination. INTERVENTION: VEMP responses were measured at threshold to click and 250, 500, 750, and 1000 Hz tone burst stimuli and at a suprathreshold level to 500 Hz toneburst stimuli at123 dB SPL. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: A mixed group factorial ANOVA (analysis of variance) and linear regression were performed to examine the effects of VEMP characteristics on age.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences between ears for any of the test parameters. There were no significant differences between age groups for n23 latency or amplitude in response to any of the stimuli. Significant mean differences did exist between age groups for p13 latency (250, 750, and 1000 Hz) and threshold (500 and 750 Hz). Age was significantly correlated with VEMP parameters. VEMP threshold was positively correlated (250, 500, 750, 1000 Hz); and amplitude was negatively correlated (500 Hz maximum). The threshold response curves revealed best frequency tuning at 500 Hz with the highest thresholds in response to click stimuli. However, this best frequency tuning dissipated with increased age. VEMP response rates also decreased with increased age.
CONCLUSION: We have demonstrated that minor differences in VEMP responses occur with age. Given the reduced response rates and flattened frequency tuning curve for individuals over the age of 60, frequency tuning curves may not be a good diagnostic indicator for this age group.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19764171      PMCID: PMC2749261          DOI: 10.3766/jaaa.20.8.6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol        ISSN: 1050-0545            Impact factor:   1.664


  31 in total

1.  The effect of click repetition rate on vestibular evoked myogenic potential.

Authors:  C H Wu; T Murofushi
Journal:  Acta Otolaryngol       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 1.494

2.  The influence of voluntary tonic EMG level on the vestibular-evoked myogenic potential.

Authors:  Faith W Akin; Owen D Murnane; Peter C Panus; Stacy K Caruthers; Amy E Wilkinson; Tina M Proffitt
Journal:  J Rehabil Res Dev       Date:  2004-05

3.  Effect of click duration on vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials.

Authors:  Tsung-Wei Huang; Hsuan-Chao Su; Po-Wen Cheng
Journal:  Acta Otolaryngol       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 1.494

4.  Normative data for P1/N1-latencies of vestibular evoked myogenic potentials induced by air- or bone-conducted tone bursts.

Authors:  Dietmar Basta; Ingo Todt; Arne Ernst
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 3.708

5.  Vestibular evoked myogenic potentials (VEMP) can detect asymptomatic saccular hydrops.

Authors:  Ming-Yee Lin; Ferdinand C A Timmer; Brad S Oriel; Guangwei Zhou; John J Guinan; Sharon G Kujawa; Barbara S Herrmann; Saumil N Merchant; Steven D Rauch
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 3.325

6.  Improving vestibular evoked myogenic potential reliability by using a blood pressure manometer.

Authors:  Robby Vanspauwen; Floris L Wuyts; Paul H Van de Heyning
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 3.325

7.  Sound-evoked activity in primary afferent neurons of a mammalian vestibular system.

Authors:  M P McCue; J J Guinan
Journal:  Am J Otol       Date:  1997-05

8.  Response of guinea pig vestibular nucleus neurons to clicks.

Authors:  T Murofushi; I S Curthoys; D P Gilchrist
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  A method for quantitative assessment of vestibular otopathology.

Authors:  S N Merchant
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 3.325

10.  Aging effect on vestibular evoked myogenic potential.

Authors:  Hsuan-Chao Su; Tsung-Wei Huang; Yi-Ho Young; Po-Wen Cheng
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 2.311

View more
  29 in total

1.  [Recording cervical and ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potentials. Part 2: influencing factors, evaluation of findings and clinical significance].

Authors:  L E Walther; K Hörmann; O Pfaar
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 1.284

Review 2.  Geriatric vestibulopathy assessment and management.

Authors:  Joseph M Furman; Yael Raz; Susan L Whitney
Journal:  Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 2.064

3.  Characterization of age-related changes in sacculocolic response parameters assessed by cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potentials.

Authors:  Niraj Kumar Singh; Ranjitha S Kashyap; L Supreetha; V Sahana
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2013-08-28       Impact factor: 2.503

4.  Tuning of the ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potential (oVEMP) to AC sound shows two separate peaks.

Authors:  Alexander S Zhang; Sendhil Govender; James G Colebatch
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-06-30       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Vestibular, Visual Acuity, and Balance Outcomes in Children With Cochlear Implants: A Preliminary Report.

Authors:  Kristen L Janky; Diane Givens
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2015 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.570

6.  Band limited chirp stimulation in vestibular evoked myogenic potentials.

Authors:  Leif Erik Walther; Mario Cebulla
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2016-01-12       Impact factor: 2.503

7.  Normative data for vestibular evoked myogenic potential in different age groups among a heterogeneous Indian population.

Authors:  Feroze K Khan; Achamma Balraj; Anjali Lepcha
Journal:  Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2013-11-06

8.  Big Stimulus, Little Ears: Safety in Administering Vestibular-Evoked Myogenic Potentials in Children.

Authors:  Megan L A Thomas; Denis Fitzpatrick; Ryan McCreery; Kristen L Janky
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 1.664

9.  Effects of High Sound Exposure During Air-Conducted Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potential Testing in Children and Young Adults.

Authors:  Amanda I Rodriguez; Megan L A Thomas; Denis Fitzpatrick; Kristen L Janky
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2018 Mar/Apr       Impact factor: 3.570

10.  Air-conducted oVEMPs provide the best separation between intact and superior canal dehiscent labyrinths.

Authors:  Kristen L Janky; Kimanh D Nguyen; Miriam Welgampola; M Geraldine Zuniga; John P Carey
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 2.311

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.