不同动态平衡条件下前庭诱发肌电位的评价。

IF 1.7 4区医学 Q2 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY

Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology Pub Date : 2025-09-17 DOI:10.1002/lio2.70253

Nihal Evran, Gulcin Hancer Arslan, Murat Arslan, Selis Gulseven Guven, Ahmet Koder, Erdogan Bulut

{"title":"不同动态平衡条件下前庭诱发肌电位的评价。","authors":"Nihal Evran, Gulcin Hancer Arslan, Murat Arslan, Selis Gulseven Guven, Ahmet Koder, Erdogan Bulut","doi":"10.1002/lio2.70253","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>This study aimed to investigate balance system modifications under different conditions using cervical Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potentials (c-VEMP) testing. Specifically, we examined vestibular compensation mechanisms in various dynamic balance positions through evoked potential analysis.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>The study conducted c-VEMP test repetitions on 45 healthy subjects under different conditions. Participants underwent comprehensive otoscopic examination and hearing and balance assessments, with only those demonstrating normal hearing included in the analysis. c-VEMP testing was performed under three distinct conditions: condition 1 (standing on a flat surface with eyes open), condition 2 (standing on a flat surface with eyes closed), and condition 3 (standing on a FoamPad with eyes open). The analysis evaluated P1-N1 latencies and amplitudes in c-VEMP responses, with subsequent statistical analysis of the collected data.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Analysis revealed statistically significant differences in P1-N1 amplitudes and latencies in left ears when comparing conditions 1 and 2 (<i>p</i> < 0.01). Right ears demonstrated significant differences only in amplitudes between conditions 1 and 2 (<i>p</i> < 0.01). Comparison of conditions 2 and 3 yielded statistically significant differences in P1-N1 amplitudes and latencies for left ears (<i>p</i> < 0.01), while right ears showed significant differences in amplitudes and N1 latency only (<i>p</i> < 0.01). No significant differences were observed in either ear when comparing conditions 1 and 3 (<i>p</i> > 0.05).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Our findings suggest that while the vestibular system is fundamental, visual input plays a more substantial role in balance maintenance compared to proprioceptive input.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Level of Evidence</h3>\n \n <p>3.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48529,"journal":{"name":"Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology","volume":"10 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12442251/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potentials in Different Dynamic Equilibrium Conditions\",\"authors\":\"Nihal Evran, Gulcin Hancer Arslan, Murat Arslan, Selis Gulseven Guven, Ahmet Koder, Erdogan Bulut\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/lio2.70253\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objectives</h3>\\n \\n <p>This study aimed to investigate balance system modifications under different conditions using cervical Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potentials (c-VEMP) testing. Specifically, we examined vestibular compensation mechanisms in various dynamic balance positions through evoked potential analysis.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>The study conducted c-VEMP test repetitions on 45 healthy subjects under different conditions. Participants underwent comprehensive otoscopic examination and hearing and balance assessments, with only those demonstrating normal hearing included in the analysis. c-VEMP testing was performed under three distinct conditions: condition 1 (standing on a flat surface with eyes open), condition 2 (standing on a flat surface with eyes closed), and condition 3 (standing on a FoamPad with eyes open). The analysis evaluated P1-N1 latencies and amplitudes in c-VEMP responses, with subsequent statistical analysis of the collected data.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Analysis revealed statistically significant differences in P1-N1 amplitudes and latencies in left ears when comparing conditions 1 and 2 (<i>p</i> < 0.01). Right ears demonstrated significant differences only in amplitudes between conditions 1 and 2 (<i>p</i> < 0.01). Comparison of conditions 2 and 3 yielded statistically significant differences in P1-N1 amplitudes and latencies for left ears (<i>p</i> < 0.01), while right ears showed significant differences in amplitudes and N1 latency only (<i>p</i> < 0.01). No significant differences were observed in either ear when comparing conditions 1 and 3 (<i>p</i> > 0.05).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>Our findings suggest that while the vestibular system is fundamental, visual input plays a more substantial role in balance maintenance compared to proprioceptive input.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Level of Evidence</h3>\\n \\n <p>3.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48529,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology\",\"volume\":\"10 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12442251/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/lio2.70253\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/lio2.70253","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

目的：利用颈椎前庭诱发肌源性电位（c-VEMP）测试研究不同条件下平衡系统的改变。具体来说，我们通过诱发电位分析研究了不同动态平衡位置的前庭代偿机制。方法：对45名健康受试者在不同条件下进行c-VEMP重复测试。参与者接受了全面的耳镜检查，听力和平衡评估，只有那些听力正常的人被纳入分析。c-VEMP测试在三种不同的条件下进行：条件1（站在平坦的表面上睁开眼睛），条件2（站在平坦的表面上闭上眼睛）和条件3（站在FoamPad上睁开眼睛）。分析评估了c-VEMP反应的P1-N1潜伏期和振幅，随后对收集的数据进行统计分析。结果：对比条件1和条件2，左耳P1-N1振幅和潜伏期差异有统计学意义（p p p p p > 0.05）。结论：我们的研究结果表明，虽然前庭系统是基本的，但视觉输入在平衡维持方面比本体感觉输入发挥更大的作用。证据等级：3。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

Evaluation of Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potentials in Different Dynamic Equilibrium Conditions

查看原文本刊更多论文

Evaluation of Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potentials in Different Dynamic Equilibrium Conditions

Objectives

This study aimed to investigate balance system modifications under different conditions using cervical Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potentials (c-VEMP) testing. Specifically, we examined vestibular compensation mechanisms in various dynamic balance positions through evoked potential analysis.

Methods

The study conducted c-VEMP test repetitions on 45 healthy subjects under different conditions. Participants underwent comprehensive otoscopic examination and hearing and balance assessments, with only those demonstrating normal hearing included in the analysis. c-VEMP testing was performed under three distinct conditions: condition 1 (standing on a flat surface with eyes open), condition 2 (standing on a flat surface with eyes closed), and condition 3 (standing on a FoamPad with eyes open). The analysis evaluated P1-N1 latencies and amplitudes in c-VEMP responses, with subsequent statistical analysis of the collected data.

Results

Analysis revealed statistically significant differences in P1-N1 amplitudes and latencies in left ears when comparing conditions 1 and 2 (p < 0.01). Right ears demonstrated significant differences only in amplitudes between conditions 1 and 2 (p < 0.01). Comparison of conditions 2 and 3 yielded statistically significant differences in P1-N1 amplitudes and latencies for left ears (p < 0.01), while right ears showed significant differences in amplitudes and N1 latency only (p < 0.01). No significant differences were observed in either ear when comparing conditions 1 and 3 (p > 0.05).

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that while the vestibular system is fundamental, visual input plays a more substantial role in balance maintenance compared to proprioceptive input.