Dergiler / Annals of Medical Research / 2020 / Cilt: 27 - Sayı: 3

Is chirp more effective than click and tone-burst during oVEMP test?

Sayfa
819–824
Yayın Tarihi
2022-10-12
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

In the light of these unique results withchirp stimulus, utricular hair cells may have similar frequency specific tonotopic organization as seen in cochlea.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Aim: We aimed to show the effectivity of chirp stimulus and to compare with tone-burst and click stimulus during ocular VEMP(oVEMP) and also to exhibit same stimulation response pattern in utricle as seen in cochlea.Material and Methods: A total of 85 healthy volunteers without any vestibular and otologic disease history were enrolled in thisstudy.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:N1, P1 latencies,N1P1 amplitudes and asymmetry ratios were investigated for each stimulus type according to age subgroups and sex.Results: The ratio of presence of oVEMP response was found to be 94.1%, 82.1% and 98.8% with tone-burst, click and chirp stimulirespectively.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:In the light of these unique results withchirp stimulus, utricular hair cells may have similar frequency specific tonotopic organization as seen in cochlea.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Abstract

Aim: We aimed to show the effectivity of chirp stimulus and to compare with tone-burst and click stimulus during ocular VEMP(oVEMP) and also to exhibit same stimulation response pattern in utricle as seen in cochlea.Material and Methods: A total of 85 healthy volunteers without any vestibular and otologic disease history were enrolled in thisstudy. Three different types of air conduction stimuli (tone-burst, click and chirp) were used for the oVEMP test. N1, P1 latencies,N1P1 amplitudes and asymmetry ratios were investigated for each stimulus type according to age subgroups and sex.Results: The ratio of presence of oVEMP response was found to be 94.1%, 82.1% and 98.8% with tone-burst, click and chirp stimulirespectively. The latencies were significantly shorter in chirp stimulus with respect to others in both ears. The amplitudes were alsosignificantly larger in chirp stimulus with respect to other in both ears. According to analysis of N1P1 asymmetry ratios, N1 and P1latency asymmetry, there were no statistically significant difference in these values within each stimulus types.Conclusion: oVEMP is more practical, easier, faster and less invasive method. oVEMP results with chirp stimulus have shorterlatency and higher amplitude and more clear waveform morphology with higher ratio of response when compared to click and toneburst stimulus. As a result, chirp is a reliable and suitable stimulus type for oVEMP analysis. In the light of these unique results withchirp stimulus, utricular hair cells may have similar frequency specific tonotopic organization as seen in cochlea.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

KORKMAZ, M. H., BAS, B., KESEROGLU, K., ER, S., ÖZDEK, A. (2022). Is chirp more effective than click and tone-burst during oVEMP test?. Annals of Medical Research, Cilt: 27 - Sayı: 3, 819–824. https://ajindex.com/articles/446061

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (15)

  1. Rosengren SM, McAngus Todd NP, Colebatch JG. Vestibular-evoked extraocularpotentials produced by stimulation with bone-conducted sound.Clin Neurophysiol 2005;116:1938-48
  2. Todd NP, Rosengren SM, Aw ST, et al Ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potentials (OVEMPs) produced by air- and bone-conducted sound. Clin Neurophysiol 2007;118:381-90
  3. Kantner C, Gürkov R. Characteristics and clinical applications of ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potentials. Hear Res 2012; 294:55-63
  4. Weber KP, Rosengren SM. Clinical utility of ocular vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials (oVEMPs). Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep 2015;15:22
  5. Curthoys IS, Vulovic V, Burgess AM, et al. Neural basis of new clinical vestibular tests: otolithic neural responses to sound and vibration. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol 2014;41:371-80
  6. Kantner C, Hapfelmeier A, Drexl M, et al The effects of rise/fall time and plateau time on ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potentials.Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2014;271:2401-7
  7. Murnane OD, Akin FW, Kelly KJ, et al. Effects of stimulus and recording parameters on the air conduction ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potential. J Am Acad Audiol 2011;22:469-80
  8. Rosengren SM, Govender S, Colebatch JG. Ocular and cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potentials produced by air- and bone-conducted stimuli: comparative properties and effects of age. Clin Neurophysiol 2011;122:2282-9
  9. Kumar K, Bhat JS, Sequeira NM, et al.Ageing Effect on Air-Conducted Ocular Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potential. Audiol Res 2015;315:121
  10. Elberling C, Don M. A direct approach for the design of chirp stimuli used for the recording of auditory brainstem responses. J Acoust Soc Am 2010; 128:2955-64
  11. Dau T, Wegner O, Mellert V, et al. Auditory brainstem responses with optimized chirp signals compensating basilar-membrane dispersion. J Acoust Soc Am 2000; 107:1530-40
  12. Wang BC, Liang Y, Liu XL, et al. Comparison of chirp versus click and tone pip stimulation for cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potentials. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2014; 271:3139-46
  13. Özgür A, Çelebi Erdivanlı Ö, Özergin Coşkun Z, et al. Comparison of Tone Burst, Click and Chirp Stimulation in Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potential Testing in Healthy People. J Int Adv Otol 2015;11:33-5
  14. Walther LE, Cebulla M. Band limited chirp stimulation in vestibular evoked myogenic potentials. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2016;273:2983-91
  15. Perez N, Rama-Lopez J. Head-impulse and caloric tests in patients wi