Electrode Montage for Bilateral Cervical Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potential (cVEMP) Testing.

IF 1 4区 医学 Q3 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY Journal of the American Academy of Audiology Pub Date : 2024-01-19 DOI:10.1055/a-2250-3096
Jessie N Patterson, Nour El Hidek, Kristen L Janky
{"title":"Electrode Montage for Bilateral Cervical Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potential (cVEMP) Testing.","authors":"Jessie N Patterson, Nour El Hidek, Kristen L Janky","doi":"10.1055/a-2250-3096","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potentials (cVEMPs) are predominantly ipsilateral, myogenic responses originating from saccular activation. Some individuals have contralateral-crossed cVEMP responses with monaural air-conducted stimulation (ACS) which can contaminate cVEMP responses with bilateral stimulation. While the origin of the contralateral-crossed response is under debate, its presence has implications for cVEMP testing with midline bone conduction vibration (BCV).</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this study was to determine the origin of the contralateral-crossed cVEMP response. It was hypothesized that the crossed response is due to electrode contamination and would disappear with a modified electrode montage.</p><p><strong>Research design: </strong>Cross-sectional research study.</p><p><strong>Study sample: </strong>Fifteen healthy participants (30 ears; mean age: 27.4 19-39; 10 females).</p><p><strong>Data collection and analysis: </strong>Participants completed cVEMP testing using three stimulation methods (monoaural ACS, binaural ACS, and midline BCV) and two electrode montages (sternum reference and Fp reference).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the monoaural ACS with sternum reference condition, 53.3% ears had contralateral-crossed cVEMP responses that were in-phase with the ipsilateral response for all but 3 ears. Whereas in the monoaural ACS with Fp reference condition, 3% had a contralateral-crossed cVEMP response. ACS and BCV cVEMP corrected amplitudes were significantly larger in the sternum reference conditions, which is attributed to artificial enhancement from the in-phase contralateral-crossed responses.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The significant reduction of contralateral-crossed responses in the Fp reference condition suggests that the contralateral-crossed cVEMP response is due to reference electrode contamination and may be a more appropriate reference placement when completing cVEMPs with midline BCV.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this study was to determine the origin of the contralateral-crossed cVEMP response. It was hypothesized that the crossed response is due to electrode contamination and would disappear with a modified electrode montage.</p><p><strong>Research design: </strong>Cross-sectional research study.</p><p><strong>Study sample: </strong>Fifteen healthy participants (30 ears; mean age: 27.4 19-39; 10 females).</p><p><strong>Data collection and analysis: </strong>Participants completed cVEMP testing using three stimulation methods (monoaural ACS, binaural ACS, and midline BCV) and three electrode montages (sternum reference, Fp reference, and active on Fp).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the monoaural ACS with sternum reference condition, 53.3% ears had contralateral-crossed cVEMP responses that were in-phase with the ipsilateral response for all but 3 ears. Whereas in the monoaural ACS with Fp reference condition, 3% had a contralateral-crossed cVEMP response. No participants demonstrated responses using Fp for the active electrode suggesting this is a neutral site. ACS and BCV cVEMP corrected amplitudes were significantly larger in the sternum reference conditions, which is attributed to artificial enhancement from the in-phase contralateral-crossed responses.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The significant reduction of contralateral-crossed responses in the Fp reference condition suggests that the contralateral-crossed cVEMP response is due to reference electrode contamination and may be a more appropriate reference placement when completing cVEMPs with midline BCV.</p>","PeriodicalId":50021,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Audiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Academy of Audiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2250-3096","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potentials (cVEMPs) are predominantly ipsilateral, myogenic responses originating from saccular activation. Some individuals have contralateral-crossed cVEMP responses with monaural air-conducted stimulation (ACS) which can contaminate cVEMP responses with bilateral stimulation. While the origin of the contralateral-crossed response is under debate, its presence has implications for cVEMP testing with midline bone conduction vibration (BCV).

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine the origin of the contralateral-crossed cVEMP response. It was hypothesized that the crossed response is due to electrode contamination and would disappear with a modified electrode montage.

Research design: Cross-sectional research study.

Study sample: Fifteen healthy participants (30 ears; mean age: 27.4 19-39; 10 females).

Data collection and analysis: Participants completed cVEMP testing using three stimulation methods (monoaural ACS, binaural ACS, and midline BCV) and two electrode montages (sternum reference and Fp reference).

Results: In the monoaural ACS with sternum reference condition, 53.3% ears had contralateral-crossed cVEMP responses that were in-phase with the ipsilateral response for all but 3 ears. Whereas in the monoaural ACS with Fp reference condition, 3% had a contralateral-crossed cVEMP response. ACS and BCV cVEMP corrected amplitudes were significantly larger in the sternum reference conditions, which is attributed to artificial enhancement from the in-phase contralateral-crossed responses.

Conclusions: The significant reduction of contralateral-crossed responses in the Fp reference condition suggests that the contralateral-crossed cVEMP response is due to reference electrode contamination and may be a more appropriate reference placement when completing cVEMPs with midline BCV.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine the origin of the contralateral-crossed cVEMP response. It was hypothesized that the crossed response is due to electrode contamination and would disappear with a modified electrode montage.

Research design: Cross-sectional research study.

Study sample: Fifteen healthy participants (30 ears; mean age: 27.4 19-39; 10 females).

Data collection and analysis: Participants completed cVEMP testing using three stimulation methods (monoaural ACS, binaural ACS, and midline BCV) and three electrode montages (sternum reference, Fp reference, and active on Fp).

Results: In the monoaural ACS with sternum reference condition, 53.3% ears had contralateral-crossed cVEMP responses that were in-phase with the ipsilateral response for all but 3 ears. Whereas in the monoaural ACS with Fp reference condition, 3% had a contralateral-crossed cVEMP response. No participants demonstrated responses using Fp for the active electrode suggesting this is a neutral site. ACS and BCV cVEMP corrected amplitudes were significantly larger in the sternum reference conditions, which is attributed to artificial enhancement from the in-phase contralateral-crossed responses.

Conclusions: The significant reduction of contralateral-crossed responses in the Fp reference condition suggests that the contralateral-crossed cVEMP response is due to reference electrode contamination and may be a more appropriate reference placement when completing cVEMPs with midline BCV.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
用于双侧颈前庭诱发肌源性电位 (cVEMP) 测试的电极蒙太奇。
背景:颈前庭诱发肌源性电位(cVEMPs)主要是同侧的肌源性反应,源于骶肌激活。有些人在单耳气导刺激(ACS)下会出现对侧交叉的 cVEMP 反应,这会污染双侧刺激下的 cVEMP 反应。虽然对侧交叉反应的起源还存在争议,但它的存在对使用中线骨传导振动(BCV)进行 cVEMP 测试有影响。假设交叉反应是由电极污染引起的,并将在修改电极蒙太奇后消失:横断面研究:15 名健康参与者(30 耳;平均年龄:27.4 19-39 岁;10 名女性):参与者使用三种刺激方法(单耳 ACS、双耳 ACS 和中线 BCV)和两种电极蒙太奇(胸骨参考和 Fp 参考)完成 cVEMP 测试:在以胸骨为参照的单耳 ACS 条件下,53.3% 的耳朵出现了对侧交叉的 cVEMP 反应,除 3 只耳朵外,其他耳朵的 cVEMP 反应均与同侧反应同相。而在以 Fp 为参考的单耳 ACS 条件下,3% 的耳朵出现对侧交叉的 cVEMP 反应。在胸骨参考条件下,ACS 和 BCV cVEMP 校正振幅明显增大,这是由于同相对侧交叉反应的人为增强所致:在 Fp 参考条件下,对侧交叉反应明显减少,这表明对侧交叉 cVEMP 反应是由参考电极污染引起的,在完成中线 BCV cVEMP 时,对侧交叉可能是更合适的参考位置。假设交叉反应是由电极污染引起的,并将在修改电极蒙太奇后消失:横断面研究:15 名健康参与者(30 耳;平均年龄:27.4 19-39 岁;10 名女性):参与者使用三种刺激方法(单耳 ACS、双耳 ACS 和中线 BCV)和三种电极蒙太奇(胸骨参考、Fp 参考和 Fp 上的活动)完成 cVEMP 测试:在有胸骨参考的单耳 ACS 条件下,53.3% 的耳朵有对侧交叉的 cVEMP 反应,除 3 只耳朵外,其他所有耳朵的 cVEMP 反应都与同侧反应同相。而在以 Fp 为参考的单耳 ACS 条件下,3% 的耳朵出现了对侧交叉的 cVEMP 反应。没有参与者显示出使用 Fp 作为活动电极的反应,这表明这是一个中性部位。在胸骨参考条件下,ACS 和 BCV cVEMP 校正振幅显著增大,这归因于同相对侧交叉反应的人为增强:结论:在 Fp 参比条件下,对侧交叉反应明显减少,这表明对侧交叉 cVEMP 反应是由参比电极污染引起的,在使用中线 BCV 完成 cVEMP 时,这可能是一个更合适的参比位置。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
46
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of the American Academy of Audiology (JAAA) is the Academy''s scholarly peer-reviewed publication, issued 10 times per year and available to Academy members as a benefit of membership. The JAAA publishes articles and clinical reports in all areas of audiology, including audiological assessment, amplification, aural habilitation and rehabilitation, auditory electrophysiology, vestibular assessment, and hearing science.
期刊最新文献
Relationship between Location of Focal Traumatic Brain Injury and Canal Involved in Benign Paroxysmal Positional Vertigo. The Effect of COVID-19 on the Efferent Auditory System in Adults. Increased Perception of Head Tilt to Galvanic Vestibular Stimulation Correlates to Motion Sickness Susceptibility in Vestibular Migraine. A Comparison of Ocular Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potentials via Audiometric and Nonaudiometric Bone Vibrators. Comparison of Multifrequency Narrow-Band CE-Chirp and Tone Burst Evoked Cervical Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potentials.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1