Jacob R Brodsky1,2, Brandon A Cusick1,2, Margaret A Kenna1, Guangwei Zhou2. 1. Department of Otolaryngology and Communication Enhancement, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. 2. Department of Otology and Laryngology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, U.S.A.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Subjective visual vertical (SVV) is a vestibular test commonly used in adults that has not been well studied in children. In this test, the patient aligns a projected line with the perceived true vertical. Deviation of >2° is usually associated with utricular dysfunction and may also be seen with central vestibular lesions. The goal of this study was to determine the efficacy of SVV in children. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, controlled study. METHODS: Thirty-three children aged 7 to 18 years with (n = 21) and without (n = 12) dizziness underwent static SVV. History, exam, rotary chair, and caloric testing were used to categorize subjects with dizziness into groups with peripheral vestibular loss (PVL), benign paroxysmal positioning vertigo (BPPV), central vertigo (CV), and nonvestibular dizziness (NVD). RESULTS: Mean SVV deviation was significantly higher in the peripheral vestibular loss group (n = 4; 2.1 ± 1.5) compared to BPPV (n = 5; 0.5 ± 0.3), CV (n = 7; 0.4 ± 0.3), NVD (n = 5; 0.6 ± 0.4), and control (n = 12; 0.7 ± 0.5) groups by one-way analysis of variance (P = .002). SVV deviation >2° demonstrated a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 75%, positive predictive value of 100%, and negative predictive value of 97% for PVL. CONCLUSIONS: SVV is a simple, noninvasive test that provides a valuable contribution to the assessment of peripheral vestibular function in children. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3b Laryngoscope, 126:727-731, 2016.
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Subjective visual vertical (SVV) is a vestibular test commonly used in adults that has not been well studied in children. In this test, the patient aligns a projected line with the perceived true vertical. Deviation of >2° is usually associated with utricular dysfunction and may also be seen with central vestibular lesions. The goal of this study was to determine the efficacy of SVV in children. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, controlled study. METHODS: Thirty-three children aged 7 to 18 years with (n = 21) and without (n = 12) dizziness underwent static SVV. History, exam, rotary chair, and caloric testing were used to categorize subjects with dizziness into groups with peripheral vestibular loss (PVL), benign paroxysmal positioning vertigo (BPPV), central vertigo (CV), and nonvestibular dizziness (NVD). RESULTS: Mean SVV deviation was significantly higher in the peripheral vestibular loss group (n = 4; 2.1 ± 1.5) compared to BPPV (n = 5; 0.5 ± 0.3), CV (n = 7; 0.4 ± 0.3), NVD (n = 5; 0.6 ± 0.4), and control (n = 12; 0.7 ± 0.5) groups by one-way analysis of variance (P = .002). SVV deviation >2° demonstrated a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 75%, positive predictive value of 100%, and negative predictive value of 97% for PVL. CONCLUSIONS: SVV is a simple, noninvasive test that provides a valuable contribution to the assessment of peripheral vestibular function in children. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3b Laryngoscope, 126:727-731, 2016.
Authors: Joshua J Gnanasegaram; William J Parkes; Sharon L Cushing; Carmen L McKnight; Blake C Papsin; Karen A Gordon Journal: Front Integr Neurosci Date: 2016-09-13