Validity of the monothermal caloric testing when compared to bithermal stimulation.

Luciana Cristina Matos Cunha, Lilian Felipe, Sarah Araújo Carvalho, Ludimila Labanca, Maurício Campelo Tavares, Denise Utsch Gonçalves
{"title":"Validity of the monothermal caloric testing when compared to bithermal stimulation.","authors":"Luciana Cristina Matos Cunha,&nbsp;Lilian Felipe,&nbsp;Sarah Araújo Carvalho,&nbsp;Ludimila Labanca,&nbsp;Maurício Campelo Tavares,&nbsp;Denise Utsch Gonçalves","doi":"10.1590/s0104-56872010000100013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>the use of monothermal caloric testing as a screening tool for vestibular asymmetry has been considered as an alternative to bithermal caloric testing.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>to evaluate the effectiveness of monothermal stimulation when compared to bithermal stimulation in the diagnosis of labyrinth asymmetry.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>the results of 389 vectoelectronystagmography, performed between 1998 and 2007, were analyzed. Monothermal stimulation at 30°C and 44°C with unilateral weakness (UW) cut-off at 20% and 25% was compared to bithermal stimulation with cut-off at 25% (gold standard). The analysis was aimed at finding which kind of monothermal caloric test (30°C or 44°C) and which kind of cut-off (20% or 25%) presented the highest specificity and sensitivity values in comparison with bithermal caloric testing.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>sensitivity and specificity of monothermal caloric tests were: 84% and 80%, at 30°C with UW at 20%; 78% and 90%, at 30°C with UW at 25%; 81% and 78%, at 44°C with UW at 20%; 76% and 85%, at 44°C with UW at 25%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>monothermal caloric testing with 30°C stimulus presented the highest sensibility and specificity values in comparison to the results obtained with bithermal stimulation. However, no significant difference was observed between such values and those obtained with 44°C stimulus. In all of the analyses, monothermal testing presented low sensitivity. Thus, the abnormal result of bithermal caloric testing might be seen as normal in monothermal stimulation. The use of monothermal testing as a screening tool is better recommended for individuals whose medical history suggests a low probability of vestibular disease.</p>","PeriodicalId":74581,"journal":{"name":"Pro-fono : revista de atualizacao cientifica","volume":"22 1","pages":"67-70"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1590/s0104-56872010000100013","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pro-fono : revista de atualizacao cientifica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/s0104-56872010000100013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: the use of monothermal caloric testing as a screening tool for vestibular asymmetry has been considered as an alternative to bithermal caloric testing.

Aim: to evaluate the effectiveness of monothermal stimulation when compared to bithermal stimulation in the diagnosis of labyrinth asymmetry.

Method: the results of 389 vectoelectronystagmography, performed between 1998 and 2007, were analyzed. Monothermal stimulation at 30°C and 44°C with unilateral weakness (UW) cut-off at 20% and 25% was compared to bithermal stimulation with cut-off at 25% (gold standard). The analysis was aimed at finding which kind of monothermal caloric test (30°C or 44°C) and which kind of cut-off (20% or 25%) presented the highest specificity and sensitivity values in comparison with bithermal caloric testing.

Results: sensitivity and specificity of monothermal caloric tests were: 84% and 80%, at 30°C with UW at 20%; 78% and 90%, at 30°C with UW at 25%; 81% and 78%, at 44°C with UW at 20%; 76% and 85%, at 44°C with UW at 25%.

Conclusion: monothermal caloric testing with 30°C stimulus presented the highest sensibility and specificity values in comparison to the results obtained with bithermal stimulation. However, no significant difference was observed between such values and those obtained with 44°C stimulus. In all of the analyses, monothermal testing presented low sensitivity. Thus, the abnormal result of bithermal caloric testing might be seen as normal in monothermal stimulation. The use of monothermal testing as a screening tool is better recommended for individuals whose medical history suggests a low probability of vestibular disease.

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
与双热刺激相比,单热热测试的有效性。
背景:使用单热热测试作为前庭不对称的筛选工具已被认为是一种替代双热热测试。目的:评价单温刺激与双温刺激在迷宫不对称诊断中的效果。方法:对1998 ~ 2007年389例患者的矢量眼震电图结果进行分析。30°C和44°C单侧强度(UW)截止值分别为20%和25%的单温增产与截止值为25%的双温增产(黄金标准)相比。分析的目的是找出哪种单热测试(30°C或44°C)和哪种截止值(20%或25%)与双热测试相比具有最高的特异性和灵敏度值。结果:在30°C, UW为20%时,单热热试验的灵敏度和特异性分别为84%和80%;在30℃,UW为25%时,分别为78%和90%;在44℃,UW为20%时,分别为81%和78%;76%和85%,44°C, UW为25%。结论:30℃刺激下的单热实验灵敏度和特异度均高于双温刺激下的结果。然而,这些值与44°C刺激下获得的值之间没有显著差异。在所有的分析中,单热测试的灵敏度较低。因此,在单热刺激中,双热测试的异常结果可能被视为正常。对于病史提示前庭疾病可能性低的个体,最好推荐使用单温检测作为筛查工具。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Oral narratives of children with typical language development. Otoacoustic emissions growth rate threshold: distortion product in neonates. Standardization of brainstem auditory evoked potential using a new device. Impact of dizziness on the life quality of elderly with chronic vestibulopathy. Extralinguistic variables, gender and age, in the self-awareness of speech impairment.
×
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