Affiliation:
1. Department of Otolaryngology, The Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, Sichuan, China
2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Fourth People’s Hospital of Nanchong, Nanchong, Sichuan, China
3. Vertigo Center, The First Medical Center of People’s Liberation Army General Hospital, Beijing, China
Abstract
Objectives: To explore the clinical manifestations and vestibular-evoked myogenic potential (VEMP) characteristics in patients diagnosed with benign recurrent vertigo (BRV) accompanied by cochlear symptoms or migraine history. Methods: A total of 34 patients were diagnosed with BRV (57 ears) and 30 healthy volunteers (60 ears) were recruited. They were divided into 4 groups: Group A consisted of 17 patients diagnosed as BRV with cochlear symptoms (21 ears), Group B consisted of 11 patients diagnosed as BRV with migraine history (22 ears), and Group C consisted of 7 patients with BRV without cochlear symptoms and migraine history (14 ears). Group D, as a Normal control (NC) group, consisted of 30 healthy volunteers without a history of migraine and cochlear symptoms. Detailed consultations and VEMP testing were performed separately. The VEMPs elicitation rate, amplitude ratio at different frequencies and amplitude statistics were compared and analyzed among the 4 groups. Results: The amplitudes of cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potential (cVEMP) have significant differences between Groups D and A, and Group C, under 500 Hz ( PAD = .017, PBD = .052, PCD = .044), but the amplitudes of cVEMP have significant differences between Groups D and A, and Group B under 1000 Hz, respectively ( PAD = .008, PBD = .020, PCD = .119). The amplitudes of ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potential (oVEMP) have significant differences between Groups D and A, and Group B, under 500 Hz, respectively ( PAD = .029, PBD = .005, PCD = .198). oVEMP amplitudes significantly differ between Groups D and A under 1000 Hz ( PAD = .049, PBD = .079, PCD = .103). The statistical difference was absent in elicit rates of cVEMP and oVEMP between the NC and experimental groups (cVEMP: PAD = .525, PBD = .917, PCD = .374; oVEMP: PAD = .678, PBD = .523, PCD = .427). Moreover, there is no significant difference between the NC group and experimental groups among VEMPs and VEMP frequency amplitude ratio ( P > .05). Conclusion: VEMPs could be a diagnostic indicator for BRV patients with cochlear symptoms. The pathogenesis of BRV may be related to damage to the otolithic apparatus.