JNNP

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH REGISTER
[Advanced]

The most recent version of this article was published on 1 May 2008

J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. Published Online First: 31 August 2007. doi:10.1136/jnnp.2007.126730
Copyright © 2007 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (Rapid PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
jnnp.2007.126730v1
79/5/559    most recent
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rosengren, S. M
Right arrow Articles by Colebatch, J. G
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Rosengren, S. M
Right arrow Articles by Colebatch, J. G

Original articles

Ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potentials (OVEMPs) in superior canal dehiscence

Sally M Rosengren 1*, Swee T Aw 2, G Michael Halmagyi 2, Neil P McAngus Todd 3 and James G Colebatch 1

1 UNSW Clinical School and Prince of Wales Medical Research Institute, Australia
2 Neurology Department, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Australia
3 Faculty of Life Science, University of Manchester, United Kingdom

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: s.rosengren{at}unsw.edu.au.

Accepted 17 August 2007


*  Abstract

Objective: Patients with superior canal dehiscence (SCD) have large sound-evoked vestibular reflexes with pathologically low threshold. We wished to determine whether a recently discovered measure of the vestibulo-ocular reflex, the ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potential (OVEMP), produces similar high amplitude, low threshold responses in SCD, and can differentiate SCD patients from normals. Methods: Nine patients with CT-confirmed SCD and 10 normal controls were stimulated with 500 Hz, 2 ms tone bursts and 0.1 ms clicks at intensities up to 142 dB peak SPL. Conventional VEMPs were recorded from the ipsilateral sternocleidomastoid muscle to determine threshold, and OVEMPs were recorded from electrode pairs placed superior and inferior to the eyes. Three-dimensional eye movements were measured with scleral dual-search coils. Results: In SCD patients OVEMP amplitudes were significantly larger than normal (P < 0.001) and thresholds were pathologically low. The n10 OVEMP in the contralateral inferior electrode became particularly large with increasing stimulus intensity (up to 25 µV) and with up-gaze (up to 40 µV). Sound-evoked (slow phase) eye movements were present in all SCD patients (vertical: upward; torsional: upper pole away from the affected side; and horizontal: towards or away from the affected side), but began only as the OVEMP response became maximal, consistent with the surface potentials being produced by activation of the extraocular muscles that generated the eye movements. Conclusions: OVEMP amplitude and threshold (particularly the contralateral inferior n10 response) differentiated SCD patients from normals. Our findings suggest that both the OVEMPs and induced eye movements in SCD are a result of intense saccular activation in addition to superior canal stimulation.


Keywords: Tullio, VEMP, superior canal dehiscence, vestibular evoked myogenic potential, vestibulo-ocular reflex







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH REGISTER
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 2007 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.