Добавил:
Sekretar
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru
t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_4433_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана
.pdf
434 BAlAnCE FunCtion AssEssmEnt And mAnAgEmEnt
https://t.me/medicina_free
Burgess, A. M., Mezey, L. E., Manzari, L., Macdougall, G. Q.,
McGarvie, L. A., & Curthoys, I. S. (2013). Effect of stimulus
rise-time on the ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potential to bone conducted vibration. Ear and Hearing, 34(6),
799–805.
Burkard, R. F., McCaslin, D. L., Jacobson, G. P., & McNeer-
ney, K. M. (2010). Spectral analyses of the vestibular evoked
myogenic potential (VEMP). Poster session presented at the
International Evoked Response Auditory Study Group:
29, Moscow, Russia.
Carey, J., & Amin, N. (2006). Evolutionary changes in the
cochlea and labyrinth: Solving the problem of sound
transmission to the balance organs of the inner ear. Ana-
tomical Record, Part A: Discoveries in Molecular, Cellular, and
Evolutionary Biology, 288(4), 482–489.
Chang, C. H., Yang, T. L., Wang, C. T., & Young, Y. H. (2007).
Measuring neck structures in relation to vestibular evoked
myogenic potentials. Clinical Neurophysiology, 118(5),
1105–1109.
Chang, C. M., Cheng, P. W., Wang, S. J., & Young, Y. H. (2010).
Effects of repetition rate of bone-conducted vibration on
ocular and cervical vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials. Clinical Neurophysiology, 121, 2121–2127.
Chang, C. M., Young, Y. H., & Cheng, P. W. (2012). Age-related
changes in ocular vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials
via galvanic vestibular stimulation and bone-conducted
vibration modes. Acta Oto-Laryngologica, 132(12), 1295–
1300. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016489.2012.708437
Chen, C. N., Wang, S. J., Wang, C. T., Hsieh, W. S., & Young, Y.
H. (2007). Vestibular evoked myogenic potentials in newborns. Audiology and Neurotology, 12(1), 59–63.
Cheng, P. W., Chen, C. C., Wang, S. J., & Young, Y. H. (2009).
Acoustic, mechanical and galvanic stimulation modes
elicit ocular vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials. Clini-
cal Neurophysiology, 120, 1841–1844.
Cheng, P. W., & Murofushi, T. (2001a). The effect of rise/
fall time on vestibular-evoked myogenic potential triggered by short tone bursts. Acta Oto-Laryngologica, 121(6),
696–699.
Cheng, P. W., & Murofushi, T. (2001b). The effects of plateau
time on vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials triggered
by tone bursts. Acta Oto-Laryngologica, 121(8), 935–938.
Cheng, Y. L., Wu, H. J., & Lee, G. S. (2012). Effects of plateau
time and ramp time on ocular vestibular evoked myogenic
potentials. Journal of Vestibular Research, 22, 33–39.
Chihara, Y., Iwasaki, S., Fujimoto, C., Ushio, M., Yamasoba,
T., & Murofushi, T. (2009). Frequency tuning properties
of ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potentials. Neurore-
port, 20(16), 1491–1495.
Cody, D. T., Jacobson, J. L., Walker, J. C., & Bickford, R. G.
(1964). Averaged evoked myogenic and cortical potientials
to sound in man. Transactions of the American Otological
Society, 52, 159–176.
Colebatch, J. G. (2013). Exploring the oVEMP montage. Clini-
cal Neurphysiology, 124, 1051–1052.
Colebatch, J. G., & Halmagyi, G. M. (1992). Vestibular evoked
potentials in human neck muscles before and after unilateral vestibular deafferentation. Neurology, 42(8), 1635–1636.
Colebatch, J. G., Halmagyi, G. M., & Skuse, N. F. (1994). Myo-
genic potentials generated by a click evoked vestibulocollic reflex. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry,
57(2), 190–197.
Colebatch, J. G., & Rothwell, J. C. (2004). Motor unit excitabil-
ity changes mediating vestibulocollic reflexes in the sternocleidomastoid muscle. Clinical Neurophysiology, 115(11),
2567–2573.
Cremer, P. D., Minor, L. B., Carey, J. P., & Della Santina, C.
C. (2000). Eye movements in patients with superior canal
dehiscence syndrome align with the abnormal canal. Neu-
rology, 55(12), 1833–1841.
Curthoys, I. S. (2010). A critical review of the neurophysiolog-
ical evidence underlying clinical vestibular testing using
sound, vibration and galvanic stimuli. Clinical Neurophysi-
ology, 121(2), 132–144.
Curthoys, I. S., Iwasaki, S., Chihara, Y., Ushio, M., McGar-
vie, L. A., & Burgess, A. M. (2011). The ocular vestibular
evoked myogenic potential to air-conducted sound: Probable superior vestibular nerve origin. Clinical Neurophysiol-
ogy, 122, 611–616.
Curthoys, I. S., Kim, J., McPhedran, S. K., & Camp, A. J.
(2006). Bone conducted vibration selectivity activates
irregular primary otolith vestibular neurons in the guinea
pig. Experimental Brain Research, 175, 256–267.
Curthoys, I. S., Manzari, L., Smulders, Y. E., & Burgess, A.
M. (2009). A review of the scientific basis and practical
application of a new test of utricular function
vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials to bone-conducted
vibration. Acta Otorhinolaryngologica Italica, 29(4), 179–186.
Donnellan, K., Wei, W., Jeffcoat, B., Mustain, W., Xu, Y., Eby,
T., & Zhou, W. (2010). Frequency tuning of bone-conducted tone burst-evoked myogenic potentials recorded
from extraocular muscles (BOVEMP) in normal human
subjects. Laryngoscope, 120(12), 2555–2560.
Fitzgerald, M. J., Comerford, P. T., & Tuffery, A. R. (1982).
Sources of innervation of the neuromuscular spindles in
sternomastoid and trapezius. Journal of Anatomy, 134(3),
471–490.
Gabelic´, T., Krbot, M., Šefer, A. B., Išqum, V., Adamec, I., &
Habek, M. (2013). Ocular and cervical vestibular evoked
myogenic potentials in patients with multiple sclerosis.
Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology, 30, 86–91.
Gacek, R. R. (1982). The anatomical-physiological basis for
vestibular function. In V. Honrubia & M. A. B. Brazier
(Eds.), Nystagmus and vertigo: Clinical approaches to the
patient with dizziness (pp. 3–23). New York NY: Academic
Press.
Gazioglu, S., & Boz, C. (2012). Ocular and cervical vestibular
evoked myogenic potentials in multiple sclerosis patients.
Clinical Neurophysiology, 123, 1872–1879.
Goldberg, J. (2000). Afferent diversity and the organization of
central vestibular pathways. Experimental Brain Research,
130, 277–297.
Govender, S., Rosengren, S. M., & Colebatch, J. G. (2009). The
effect of gaze direction on the ocular vestibular evoked
myogenic potential produced by air-conducted sound.
Clinical Neurophysiology, 120, 1386–1391.
— ocular
16. vEstiBulAr-EvoKEd myogEniC PotEntiAls (vEmPs) 435
https://t.me/medicina_free
Gozke, E., Erdal, N., & Ozkarakas, H. (2010). Ocular vestibu-
lar evoked myogenic potentials in patients with migraine.
Acta Neurologica Belgica, 110, 321–324.
Gresty, M. A., & Lempert, T. (2001). Pathophysiology and
clinical testing of otolith dysfunction. In P. Tran Ba Huy &
M. Toupet (Eds.), Otolith function and disorders (pp. 15–33).
New York, NY: Karger.
Halmagyi, G. M., Yavor, R. A., & Colebatch, J. G. (1995). Tap-
ping the head activates the vestibular system: A new use
for the clinical reflex hammer. Neurology, 45(10), 1927–1929.
Hsu, Y. S., Wang, S. J., & Young, Y. H. (2009). Ocular vestibular-
evoked myogenic potentials in children using air conducted sound stimulation. Clinical Neurophysiology, 120,
1381–1385.
Huang, C. H., Wang, S. G., & Young, Y. H. (2011). Localization
and prevalence of hydrops formation in Meniere’s disease
using a test battery. Audiology and Neurotology, 16, 41–48.
Huang, Y. C., Yang, T. L., & Young, Y. H. (2012). Feasibility of
ocular vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials (oVEMPS)
recorded with eyes closed. Clinical Neurophysiology, 123,
376–381.
Isaradisaikul, S., Strong, D. A., Moushey, J. M., Gabbard, S.
A., Ackley, S. R., & Jenkins, H. A. (2008). Reliability of vestibular evoked myogenic potentials in healthy subjects.
Otology and Neurotology, 29(4), 542–544.
Ishiyama, G. (2009). Imbalance and vertigo: The aging human
vestibular periphery. Seminars in Neurology, 29(5), 491–499.
https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0029-1241039
Ivankovic, A., Nesek, M., Starcevic, K., Krbot, S., Gabelic, T.,
Adamec, I., & Habek, M. (2013). Auditory evoked potentials and vestibular evoked myogenic potentials in evaluation of brainstem lesions in multiple sclerosis. Journal of
Neurological Sciences, 328, 24–27.
Iwasaki, S., Chihara, Y., Smulders, Y. E., Burgess, S. M., Hal-
magyi, G. M., Curthoys, I. S., & Murofushi, T. (2009). The
role of the superior vestibular nerve in generating ocular
vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials to bone conducted
vibration at Fz. Clinical Neurophysiology, 120, 588–593
Iwasaki, S., McGarvie, L. A., Halmagyi, G. M., Burgess, A. M.,
Kim, J., Colebatch, J. G., & Curthoys, I. S. (2007). Head taps
evoke a crossed vestibulo-ocular reflex. Neurology, 68(15),
1227–1229.
Jacobson, G. P., & McCaslin, D. L. (2007). The vestibular evoked
myogenic potential and other sonomotor evoked potentials.
In R. F. Burkard, M. Don, & J. J. Eggermont (Eds.), Auditory
evoked potentials: Basic principles and clinical application (pp.
572–598). Baltimore, MD: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Jaeger, R., & Haslwanter, T. (2004). Otolith responses to
dynamical stimuli: Results of a numerical investigation.
Biological Cybernetics, 90, 165–175.
Janky, K. L., & Shepard, N. (2009). Vestibular evoked myo-
genic potential (VEMP) testing: Normative threshold
response curves and effects of age. Journal of the American
Academy of Audiology, 20(8), 514–522.
Jones, S. M., Subramanian, G., Avniel, W., Guo, Y., Burkard, R.
F., & Jones, T. A. (2002). Stimulus and recording variables
and their effects on mammalian vestibular evoked potentials. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 118(1), 23–31.
Jongkees, L. B., & Philipszoon, A. J. (1964). Electronystagmor-
gaphy. Acta Oto-Laryngologica, (Suppl. 189), 189–191.
Kantner, C., Hapfelmeier, A., Drexl, M., & Gürkov, R. (2013).
The effects of rise/fall time and plateau time on ocular
vestibular evoked myogenic potentials. European Archives
of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00405013-2697-4
Karino, S., Ito, K., Ochiai, A., & Murofushi, T. (2005). Indepen-
dent effects of simultaneous inputs from the saccule and
lateral semicircular canal. Evaluation using VEMPs. Clini-
cal Neurophysiology, 116(7), 1707–1715. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.clinph.2005.04.007
Kelsch, T. A., Schaefer, L. A., & Esquivel, C. R. (2006). Ves-
tibular evoked myogenic potentials in young children:
Test parameters and normative data. Laryngoscope, 116(6),
895–900.
Kim, K. W., Jung, J. Y., Lee, J. H., & Suh, M. W. (2013). Capac-
ity of rectified vestibular evoked myogenic potential in
correcting asymmetric muscle contraction power. Clinical
and Experimental Otorhinolaryngology, 6(4), 209–213.
Kim, M. B., & Ban, J. H. (2012). The efficiency of simultaneous
binaural ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potentials:
A comparative study with monaural acoustic stimulation
in healthy subjects. Clinical and Experimental Otorhinolar-
yngology, 5, 188–193.
Krause, H. R., Bremerich, A., & Herrmann, M. (1991). The
innervation of the trapezius muscle in connection with
radical neck-dissection. An anatomical study. Journal of
Craniomaxillofacial Surgery, 19(2), 87–89.
Kushiro, K., Zakir, M., Ogawa, Y., Sato, H., & Uchino, Y.
(1999). Saccular and utricular inputs to sternocleidomastoid motoneurons of decerebrate cats. Experimental Brain
Research, 126(3), 410–416.
Lee, K. J., Kim, M. S., Son, E. J., Lim, H. J., Bang, J. H., & Kang,
J. G. (2008). The usefulness of rectified VEMP. Clinical and
Experimental Otorhinolaryngology, 1(3), 143–147.
Lee, S. K., Cha, C. I., Jung, T. S., Park, D. C., & Yeo, S. G.
(2008). Age-related differences in parameters of vestibular evoked myogenic potentials. Acta Oto-Laryngologica,
128(1), 66–72.
Lewis, A., Mustain, W., Xu, Y., Eby, T., & Zhou, W. (2010).
Frequency tuning in the tone burst-evoked myogenic
potentials in extraocular muscles in normal human subjects. Journal of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, 39,
491–497.
Li, M. W., Houlden, D., & Tomlinson, R. D. (1999). Click
evoked EMG responses in sternocleidomastoid muscles:
Characteristics in normal subjects. Journal of Vestibular
Research, 9(5), 327–334.
Lim, C. L., Clouston, P., Sheean, G., & Yiannikas, C. (1995).
The influence of voluntary EMG activity and click intensity on the vestibular click evoked myogenic potential.
Muscle and Nerve, 18(10), 1210–1213.
Lim, L. J., Dennis, D. L., Govender, S., & Colebatch, J. G.
(2013). Differential effects of duration for ocular and cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potentials evoked by airand bone-conducted stimuli. Experimental Brain Research,
224, 437–445.
436 BAlAnCE FunCtion AssEssmEnt And mAnAgEmEnt
https://t.me/medicina_free
Lin, M. Y., Timmer, F. C., Oriel, B. S., Zhou, G., Guinan, J. J.,
Kujawa, S. G., . . . Rauch, S. D. (2006). Vestibular evoked
myogenic potentials (VEMP) can detect asymptomatic
saccular hydrops. Laryngoscope, 116(6), 987–992.
Lysakowski, A., McCrea, R. A., & Tomlinson, R. D. (1998).
Anatomy of vestibular end organs and neural pathways.
In C. W. Cummings, J. M. Fredrickson, L. A. Harker, C. J.
Krause, M. A. Richardson, & D. E. Schuller (Eds.), Otolar-
yngology–Head and Neck Surgery (3rd ed., 2561–2583). St.
Louis, MO: Mosby.
Manzari, L., Burgess, A. M., McGarview, L. A., & Curthoys,
I. S. (2013). An indicator of probable semicircular canal
dehiscence: Ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potentials
to high frequencies. Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery,
149, 142–145.
Manzari, L., Tedesco, A. R., Burgess, A, M., & Curthoys, I. S.
(2010). Ocular and cervical vestibular-evoked myogenic
potentials to bone conducted vibration in Meniere’s disease during quiescence vs during acute attacks. Clinical
Neurophysiology, 121, 1092–1100.
McCaslin, D. L., Fowler, A., & Jacobson, G. P. (2014). Ampli-
tude normalization reduces cervical vestibular evoked
myogenic potential (cVEMP) amplitude asymmetries in
normal subjects: Proof of concept. Journal of the Ameri-
can Academy of Audiology, 25(3), 268–277. https://doi.
org/10.3766/jaaa.25.3.6
McCaslin, D. L., Jacobson, G. P., Hatton, K., Fowler, A. P., &
DeLong, A. P. (2013). The effects of amplitude normalization and EMG targets on cVEMP interaural amplitude
asymmetry. Ear and Hearing, 34(4), 482–490.
McCue, M. P., & Guinan, J. J. (1995). Spontaneous activity
and frequency selectivity of acoustically responsive vestibular afferents in the cat. Journal of Neurophysiology, 74(4),
1563–1572.
McNerney, K. M., & Burkard, R. F. (2011). The vestibular
evoked myogenic potential (VEMP): Air- versus boneconducted stimuli. Ear and Hearing, 32(6), e6–e15.
Minor, L. B., & Goldberg, J. M. (1991). Vestibular-nerve inputs
to the vestibulo-ocular reflex: A functionalablation study
in the squirrel monkey. Journal of Neuroscience, 11(6),
1636–1648.
Miyamoto, A., Seo, T., Node, M., Hashimoto, M., & Sakagami,
M. (2006). Preliminary study on vestibularevoked myogenic potential induced by bone-conducted stimuli. Otol-
ogy and Neurotology, 27(8), 1110–1114.
Murnane, O. D., Akin, F. W., Kelly, K. J., & Byrd, S. (2011).
Effects of stimulus and recording parameters on the air
conduction ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potential.
Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 22, 469–480.
Murofushi, T., & Curthoys, I. S. (1997). Physiological and
anatomical study of click-sensitive primary vestibular
afferents in the guinea pig. Acta Oto-Laryngologica, 117(1),
66–72.
Murofushi, T., Curthoys, I. S., Topple, A. N., Colebatch, J.
G., & Halmagyi, G. M. (1995). Responses of guinea pig
primary vestibular neurons to clicks. Experimental Brain
Research, 103(1), 174–178.
Murofushi, T., Matsuzaki, M., & Wu, C. H. (1999). Short tone
burst-evoked myogenic potentials on the sternocleidomastoid muscle: Are these potentials also of vestibular
origin? Archives of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery,
125(6), 660–664.
Murofushi, T., Shimizu, K., Takegoshi, H., & Cheng, P. W.
(2001). Diagnostic value of prolonged latencies in the vestibular evoked myogenic potential. Archives of Otolaryngol-
ogy–Head and Neck Surgery, 127(9), 1069–1072.
Nguyen, K. D., Welgampola, M. S., & Carey, J. P. (2010). Test-
retest reliability and age-related characteristics of the
ocular and cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potential
tests. Otology and Neurotology, 31, 793–802.
Ochi, K., Ohashi, T., & Nishino, H. (2001). Variance of ves-
tibular-evoked myogenic potentials. Laryngoscope, 111,
522–527.
Oh, S. Y., Kim, J. S., Lee, J. M., Shin, B. S., Hwang, S. B., Kwak,
K. C., . . . Kim, T. W. (2013). Ocular vestibular evoked
myogenic potentials induced by air-conducted sound in
patients with acute brainstem lesions. Clinical Neurophysi-
ology, 124, 770–778.
Papathanasiou, E. S., Murofushi, T., Akin, F. W., & Colebatch,
J. G. (2014). International guidelines for the clinical application of cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potentials:
An expert consensus report. Clinical Neurophysiology,
125(4), 658–666.
Phillips, J. O., & Backous, D. D. (2002). Evaluation of vestibu-
lar function in young children. Otolaryngologic Clinics of
North America, 35(4), 765–790.
Piker, E. G., Jacobson, G. P., Burkard, R. F., McCaslin, D. L.,
& Hood, L. J. (2013). Effects of age on the tuning of the
cVEMP and oVEMP. Ear and Hearing, 34(6), e65–e73.
Piker, E. G., Jacobson, G. P., McCaslin, D. L., & Hood, L. J.
(2011). Normal characteristics of the ocular vestibular
evoked myogenic potential. Journal of the American Acad-
emy of Audiology, 22, 222–230.
Popper, A. N., & Fay, R. R. (1993). Sound detection and pro-
cessing by fish: Critical review and major research questions. Brain, Behavior and Evolution, 41(1), 14–38.
Rauch, S. D., Zhou, G., Kujawa, S. G., Guinan, J. J., & Her-
mann, B. S. (2004). Vestibular evoked myogenic potentials
show altered tuning in patients with Meniere’s disease.
Otology and Neurotology, 25(3), 333–338.
Rosengren, S. M., Aw, S. T., Halmagyi, G. M., Todd, N. P.,
& Colebatch, J. G. (2008). Ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potentials in superior canal dehiscence. Journal of
Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 79, 559–568.
Rosengren, S. M., & Colebatch, J. G. (2011). Ocular vestibular
evoked myogenic potentials are abnormal in internuclear
ophthalmoplegia. Clinical Neurophysiology, 122, 1264–1267.
Rosengren, S. M., Colebatch, J. G., Straumann, D., & Weber,
P. (2013). Why do oVEMPs become larger when you look
up? Explaining the effect of gaze elevation on the ocular
vestibular evoked myogenic potential. Clinical Neurophysi-
ology, 124, 785–791.
Rosengren, S. M., Govender, S., & Colebatch, J. G. (2009). The
relative effectiveness of different stimulus waveforms
16. vEstiBulAr-EvoKEd myogEniC PotEntiAls (vEmPs) 437
https://t.me/medicina_free
in evoking VEMPs: significance of stimulus energy and
frequency. Journal of Vestibular Research, 19(1-2), 33–40.
https://doi.org/10.3233/VES-2009-0345
Rosengren, S. M., Govender, S., & Colebatch, J. G. (2011). Ocular
and cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potentials produced by air and bone-conducted stimuli: comparative properties and effects of age. Clinical Neurophysiology, 122(11),
2282–2289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2011.04.001
Rosengren, S. M., Welgampola, M. S., & Colebatch, J. G.
(2010). Vestibular evoked myogenic potentials: Past, present and future. Clinical Neurophysiology, 121(5), 636–651.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2009.10.016
Rosenhall, U. (1973). Degenerative patterns in the aging
human vestibular neuro-epithelia. Acta Oto-Laryngologica,
76(2), 208–220.
Sandhu, J. S., George, S. R., & Rea, P. A. (2013). The effect of
electrode position on the ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potential to air-conducted sound. Clinical Neurophys-
iology, 124, 1232–1236.
Schwarz, D. W. F., & Tomlinson, R. D. (2005). Physiology of
the vestibular system. In R. K. Jackler & D. E. Brackman
(Eds.), Neurotology (2nd ed., pp. 91–121). Philadelphia, PA:
Elsevier Mosby.
Sheykholeslami, K., Habiby Kermany, M., & Kaga, K. (2001).
Frequency sensitivity range of the saccule to bone-conducted stimuli measured by vestibular evoked myogenic
potentials. Hearing Research, 160(1–2), 58–62.
Sheykholeslami, K., & Kaga, K. (2002). The otolithic organ
as a receptor of vestibular hearing revealed by vestibularevoked myogenic potentials in patients with inner ear
anomalies. Hearing Research, 165(1–2), 62–67.
Sheykholeslami, K., Megerian, C. A., Arnold, J. E., & Kaga, J.
(2005). Vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials in infancy
and early childhood. Laryngoscope, 115(8), 1440–1444.
Sheykholeslami, K., Murofushi, T., & Kaga, K. (2001). The
effect of sternocleidomastoid electrode location on vestibular evoked myogenic potential. Auris Nasus Larynx,
28(1), 41–43.
Sheykholeslami, K., Murofushi, T., Kermany, M. H., & Kaga,
K. (2000). Bone-conducted evoked myogenic potentials
from the sternocleidomastoid muscle. Acta Oto-Laryngo-
logica, 120(6), 731–734.
Shimizu, K., Murofushi, T., Sakurai, M., & Halmagyi, M.
(2000). Vestibular evoked myogenic potentials in multiple
sclerosis. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry,
69(2), 276–277.
Shin, B. S., Oh, S. Y., Kim, J. S., Kim, T. W., Seo, M. W., Lee, H.,
& Park, Y. A. (2012). Cervical and ocular vestibular-evoked
myogenic potentials in acute vestibular neuritis. Clinical
Neurophysiology, 123, 369–375.
Streubel, S. O., Cremer, P. D., Carey, J. P., Weg, N., & Minor,
J. B. (2001). Vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials in the
diagnosis of superior canal dehiscence syndrome. Acta
Oto-Laryngologica Supplementum, 545, 41–49.
Su, H. C., Huang, T. W., Young, Y. H., & Cheng, P. W. (2004).
Aging effect on vestibular evoked myogenic potential.
Otology and Neurotology, 25(6), 977–980.
Timmer, F. C., Zhou, G., Guinan, J. J., Kujawa, S. G., Her-
rmann, B. S., & Rauch, S. D. (2006). Vestibular evoked
myogenic potential (VEMP) in patients with Ménière’s
disease with drop attacks. Laryngoscope, 116(5), 776–779.
Todd, N. P., Cody, F. W., & Banks, J. R. (2000). A saccular ori-
gin of frequency tuning in myogenic vestibular evoked
potentials: Implications for human responses to loud
sounds. Hearing Research, 141(1–2), 180–188.
Todd, N. P., Rosengren, S. M., Govender, S., & Colebatch, J.
G. (2009). Low-frequency tuning in the human vestibular
ocular projection is determined by both peripheral and
central mechanisms. Neuroscience Letters, 458(1), 43–47.
Townsend, G. L., & Cody, D. T. (1971). The averaged inion
response evoked by acoustic stimulation: Its relation to
the saccule. Annals of Otology, Rhinology, and Laryngology,
80(1), 121–131.
Tseng, C. L., Chou, C. H., & Young, Y. H. (2010). Aging effect
on the ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potentials. Otol-
ogy and Neurotology, 31, 659–663.
Tullio, P. (1929). Some experiments and considerations on experi-
mental otology and phonetics. Bologna, Italy: Licinio Capelli.
Uzun-Coruhlu, H., Curthoys, I. S., & Jones, A. S. (2007).
Attachment of the utricular and saccular maculae to the
temporal bone. Hearing Research, 233, 77–85.
Vanspauwen, R., Wuyts, F. L., & Va de Henning, P. H. (2006).
Validity of a new feedback method for the VEMP test. Acta
Oto-Laryngologica, 162(8), 796–800.
von Békésy, G. (1935). Über akustishe Reizung des Vestibular-
apparates. Arch. F D Ges Physiol., 236, 59.
Wang, C. T., & Young, Y. H. (2006). Comparison of the head
elevation versus rotation methods in eliciting vestibular evoked myogenic potentials. Ear and Hearing, 27(4),
376–381. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.aud.0000224126.24
604.db
Wang, S. J., Jaw, F. S., & Young, Y. H. (2009). Ocular vestib-
ular-evoked myogenic potentials elicited from monaural
versus binaural acoustic stimulations. Clinical Neurophysi-
ology, 120, 420–423.
Wang, S. J., Jaw, F. S., & Young, Y. H. (2013). Optimizing the
bandpass filter for acoustic stimuli in recording ocular
vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials. Neuroscience Let-
ters, 542, 12–16.
Wang, S. J., & Young, Y. H. (2003). Vestibular evoked myo-
genic potentials using simultaneous binaural acoustic
stimulation. Hearing Research, 185(1–2), 43–48.
Ward, B. K., Wenzel, A., Ritzl, E. K., Gutierrez-Hernandez,
S., Della Sartina, C. C., Minor, L. B., & Carey, L. P. (2013).
Near-dehiscence: clinical findings in patients with thin
bone over the superior semi-circular canal. Otology and
Neurotology, 34(8), 1421–1428.
Welgampola, M. S., & Colebatch, J. G. (2001a). Characteris-
tics of tone burst-evoked myogenic potentials in the sternocleidomastoid muscles. Otology and Neurotology, 22(6),
796–802.
Welgampola, M. S., & Colebatch, J. G. (2001b). Vestibulocol-
lic reflexes: Normal values and the effect of age. Clinical
Neurophysiology, 112(11), 1971–1979.
438 BAlAnCE FunCtion AssEssmEnt And mAnAgEmEnt
https://t.me/medicina_free
Welgampola, M. S., & Colebatch, J. G. (2005). Characteristics
and clinical applications of vestibular-evoked myogenic
potentials. Neurology, 64, 1682–1688.
Welgampola, M. S., Rosengren, S. M., Halmagyi, G. M., &
Colebatch, J. G. (2003). Vestibular activation by bone conducted sound. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psy-
chiatry, 74(6), 771–778. Erratum in: Journal of Neurology,
Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, 76(9), 1312.
Winters, S. M., Berg, I. T., Grolman, W., & Klis, S. F. (2012).
Ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potentials: Frequency
tuning to air-conducted acoustic stimuli in healthy subjects
and Meniere’s disease. Audiology and Neurotology, 17, 12–19.
Wit, H. P., & Kingma, C. M. (2006). A simple model for the
generation of the vestibular evoked myogenic potential
(VEMP). Clinical Neurophysiology, 117(6), 1354–1358.
Wright, C. G., Hubbard, D. G., & Clark, G. M. (1979). Obser-
vations of human fetal otoconial membranes. Annals of
Otology, 88, 267–274.
Wu, C. H., & Murofushi, T. (1999). The effect of click repeti-
tion rate on vestibular evoked myogenic potential. Acta
Oto-Laryngologica, 119, 29–32.
Yang, T. L., & Young, Y. H. (2003). Comparison of tone burst
and tapping evocation of myogenic potentials in patients
with chronic otitis media. Ear and Hearing, 24(3), 191–194.
Zapala, D. A., & Brey, R. H. (2004). Clinical experience with
the vestibular evoked myogenic potential. Journal of the
American Academy of Audiology, 15(3), 198–215.
Zhang, A. S., Govender, S., & Colebatch, J. G. (1985). Tun-
ing of the ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potential
to bone-conducted sound stimulation. Journal of Applied
Physiology, 112, 1279–1290.
Zhang, A. S., Govender, S., & Colebatch, J. G. (2011). Tun-
ing of the ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potential
(oVEMP) to AC sound shows two separate peaks. Experi-
mental Brain Research, 213, 111–116.
Zhang, A. S., Govender, S., & Colebatch, J. G. (2012). Tun-
ing of the ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potential
(oVEMP) to airand bone-conducted sound stimulation
in superior canal dehiscence. Experimental Brain Research,
223(1), 51–64.
Zuniga, M. G., Janky, K. L., Nguyen, K. D., Welgampola, M.
S., & Carey, J. P. (2013). Ocular versus cervical VEMPs in
the diagnosis of superior semicircular canal dehiscence
syndrome. Otology and Neurotology, 34, 121–126.
17
https://t.me/medicina_free
Electrocochleography (ECochG)
Paul R. Kileny and Devin L. McCaslin
introduCtion
Electrophysiology terminology does not always refer
to the same neurophysiologic phenomenon or the same
application. In one form or another, the term electro-
cochleography has preceded the majority of the current
terms referring to auditory neurodiagnostic procedures. An early reference and description of clinical
applications of the “cochleogram” is provided in an
article authored by noted otologist Julius Lempert and
noted auditory physiologists Ernst Glen Weaver and
Merle Lawrence, published in the Archives of Otolaryn-
gology in 1947. In one of the first documented translational studies, this team recorded electrical potentials
from the exposed round window of patients undergoing surgeries for otosclerosis, tinnitus, or Ménière’s
disease. They envisioned the use of these potentials
for diagnosis and for surgical guidance — an early precursor of intraoperative monitoring. They referred to
the response they recorded as the cochleogram. Today
we would refer to it as the cochlear microphonic. They
stated that “the cochlear potentials are representative
of end organ activity not of the behavior of the auditory nerve or the more central processes.” They cited
a study published in 1934 (Guttmann & Barrera, 1934)
in which “sectioning the cochlear nerve in cats but
sparing the blood supply to the cochlea, these cochlear
potentials are spared as they depend only on the integrity of the sensory cells.”
In the 1970s, there was a significant increase in
research and publications related to auditory electro-
physiologic measures obtained from human subjects
and patients. This was in part prompted by the discovery of the auditory brainstem response by Jewett
and Williston (1971), and by advances in the technology used for recording electrophysiologic phenomena.
While the term electrocochleography (ECochG) was at
the time used to refer to what we would call today
the auditory brainstem response (Terkildsen, Osterhammel, & Huis in’t Veld, 1973), the term began to be
used to describe the simultaneous recording of electrical potentials generated by cochlear receptors and
cochlear nerve in response to acoustic stimulation,
and recorded relatively near-field (i.e., the promontory or the round window). In 1976, the proceedings of a symposium on ECochG held in June 1974 at
Yeshiva University, New York, were published as a
book (Ruben, Elberling, & Salomon, 1976). This book
contained both experimental work in animals as well
as clinical studies in patients using ECochG, including studies dealing with recording techniques and
sites, specific pathologies such as Ménière’s disease,
and a comparison of threshold estimation using
ECochG versus cortical-evoked responses, to name
just a few.
Since then, the level of interest and frequency of
diagnostic utilization of ECochG has fluctuated somewhat. It never really lost popularity among our European colleagues; however, here in the United States
the advent of noninvasive, tympanic membrane surface recording techniques has definitely had a positive
effect on the clinical utilization and clinical diagnostic
innovations using ECochG.
439
440 BAlAnCE FunCtion AssEssmEnt And mAnAgEmEnt
https://t.me/medicina_free
THE NEUROPHYSIOLOGY OF
ELECTROCOCHLEOGRAPHY
The auditory-evoked response is a continuum of neurophysiological responses that begin very soon following the delivery of an effective auditory stimulus to
the ear, and extend in time as far as 1 s, reflecting the
primary auditory cortex, association cortex, and cognitive potentials associated with auditory discrimination
abilities. In the clinic, we attempt to limit the response
duration range based on specific clinical applications
and auditory-evoked response components of interest.
For instance, when we are recording auditory brainstem responses, we tend to limit recording sweep
duration to no more than 20 ms, as the components of
interest occur within approximately 10 ms following
the presentation of a stimulus.
Recording in this fashion, we ascertain we can
capture responses such as wave V of the auditory
brainstem response, known to be generated by the
nucleus of the lateral lemniscus, as it is the most relevant component for threshold of hearing estimation.
If one wishes to focus on cochlear and cochlear nerve
potentials, we can limit the recording epoch to no more
than 10 ms, as the essential components in this category
occur within 5 ms following stimulation.
What is ECochG? It is the recording of cochlear
potentials such as the cochlear microphonic (CM) and
the summating potential (SP), and the whole-nerve
action potential generated by the cochlear nerve, using
recording techniques that emphasize these particular
components. Stated earlier, based on animal studies,
our basic science and clinical forbearers already understood in the 1930s the differences between cochlear
and cochlear nerve potentials, and the effects of the
recording electrode placement on emphasizing these
responses. It is now of course clear to all of us that the
cochlear nerve action potential also referred to as N1
is in fact one and the same as wave I of the auditory
brainstem response.
For the purpose of this chapter, ECochG is defined
as the measurement of a combination of inner ear
and cochlear nerve generated potentials elicited by
a transient acoustic stimulus. In order to emphasize
the responses of interest from cochlear and auditory
nerve structures, the active electrode is placed in relative proximity of the respective generator sources. This
electrode placement can be either a transtympanic needle electrode placed on the promontory, or a tympanic
membrane surface electrode introduced by microscopic
visualization of the ear canal and tympanic membrane.
The components that make up the ECochG (depending
upon stimulus polarity) are the cochlear microphonic,
the summating potential, and the cochlear nerve compound action potential. Given that we record with a
time base of 10 ms, it is also possible to identify other
auditory-evoked potential components pertaining to
the auditory brainstem response. To summarize, the
neural-generator sources and the nature of the ECochG
components are as follows.
Cochlear Microphonic
The CM is an alternating-current potential that closely
follows the waveform of the acoustic stimulus used to
elicit the response. Thus, if the acoustic stimulus consists of a brief one- to two-cycle tone, the CM will have
a similar sinusoidal configuration with an identical
period as the acoustic stimulus. This response is related
to ionic changes when the cilia of the outer hair cells
move during stimulation.
Summating Potential
The SP is a direct-current potential that follows the
stimulus envelope and when coexisting with the CM
appears as a baseline shift of the CM. Typically, in a normal ear this baseline shift is minimal; therefore, the SP
is not very prominent. The SP arises from direct-current
intracellular potentials and is generated predominantly
by inner hair cells. While it is typically described as
following the stimulus envelope, more accurately the
SP is related to a rectified and smoothed version of the
basilar membrane displacement pattern (Dallos, 1976).
When using a very brief stimulus, like a click, the SP is
also very brief, as it precedes the action potential (AP),
or at times it blends into the leading edge of the AP.
Action Potential
The AP or N1 (the cochlear nerve compound action
potential) represents the summed activity of synchronously firing cochlear nerve fibers — in other words, the
auditory-evoked potential of the cochlear nerve synonymous to wave I of the auditory brainstem response. In
order to obtain these responses, certain recording techniques need to be employed.
RECORDING METHODS
In this section we will attempt to provide detailed
instructions to optimize the recording of an ECochG.
This information is based on personal experience with
17. ELECTROCOCHLEOGRAPHY (ECochG) 441
https://t.me/medicina_free
close to 2,000 ECochGs recorded from patients of various ages, with various auditory thresholds and normalhearing subjects.
First, the type, location, and placement of the
active electrode play a very important role in determining the quality of the recording, and the resolution
of the ECochG waveform. One of the main principles
underlying all forms of electrophysiologic recording is
that the utility of the response is only as good as the
quality of the waveform. Therefore, substantial attention needs to be paid to the technical aspects of recording a response, in particular the nature and placement
of the electrode. In order to emphasize the components
of interest (the summating potential, the action potential, and at times the cochlear microphonic), the electrode needs to be as much as possible in the proximity
of the generator sources. Much of the experimental
work involving ECochG was done in animals models
where the electrode was placed directly on the exposed
round window or even penetrating the round window
into the distal portion of the basal turn of the cochlea.
Clearly, such placement would result in large and easy
to identify potentials that necessitate very little signal
averaging. In clinical applications, for many years,
the electrode of choice was a transtympanic needle
placed onto the cochlear promontory in the vicinity
of the round window niche. This will also result in
large amplitude responses as shown in Figure 17–1.
Figure 17–1 is an illustration of a simultaneous surface
recording of the auditory brainstem response with the
reference or inverting electrode placed on the medial
surface of the earlobe along with a transtympanic
recording using a needle placed on the promontory.
Figure 17–1 illustrates the identical latency of
the surface recorded wave I and the N1 or AP of the
cochlear nerve. The difference between the two recordings is obvious: The amplitude of the promontory
recorded AP is substantially larger than the surfacerecorded wave I; however, the later waves of the auditory brainstem response are not as prominent with the
promontory recording as they are with the standard
surface recording. It is of note that the amplitude calibration of the two traces is different, and this gives
the illusion that the promontory recorded response
is only slightly larger than the surface recorded auditory brainstem response. Over the years, a variety of
extratympanic recording methods were attempted and
recommended, such as the Coats Leaf electrode consisting of strip of plastic carrying a ball electrode at
the tip, which was folded and introduced into the ear
canal, and it would stabilize within the bony portion
of the ear canal when deployed. This was uncomfortable for patients. Other extratympanic options were the
tiptrodes, consisting of a foil wrapped around a standard foam earplug used for insert earphones. This foil
was connected to a lead by means of a type of alligator
clip. This required scrubbing the lumen of the external
ear canal and then inserting the tiptrode (Figure 17–2).
The resolution of the summating potential and the
action potential recorded with this type of electrode
was not much more prominent than when recording
with a surface electrode placed on the medial surface
figure 17–1. Simultaneous standard surface (upper trace) and prom-
ontory needle (lower trace) recording of ABr and ECochG, respec-
tively, from otologically normal subject with normal hearing.
442 BALANCE FUNCTION ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT
https://t.me/medicina_free
figure 17–2. The figure on the left illustrates an electrode placed on the eardrum. The figure on the right illustrates an electrode placed on the promontory. Figure drawn by
Hoehn, all rights reserved.
Dianne
of the earlobe. Another solution promoted by several
colleagues was to place an electrode on the surface of
the tympanic membrane. This could be either a foam or
cotton wick or a hydrogel tip dipped into a conductive
medium, connected to a silver wire which is insulated
except where it connects to the wick or hydrogel, and
contained in a soft polyethylene tube. This electrode
can be guided down the ear canal under microscopic
visualization, and introduced so that the tip would
adhere to the tympanic membrane. This method
does not provide a response amplitude quite like one
obtained with a transtympanic needle, but it provides
superior resolution compared with a tiptrode and is
much more comfortable than the Coats Leaf electrode.
Currently there are two commercial versions of the
tympanic membrane surface electrode, one ending in
a cotton wick dipped into a conductive medium, the
other following a similar concept except that the tip is
an elastic hydrogel encasing the looped end of a silver wire. Both of these electrodes need to be dipped
into saline for a few minutes, and then, just prior to
introducing it into the ear canal and onto the tympanic
membrane, immersed into a conductive cream for a few
minutes. It is important to place these electrodes under
direct visualization of the ear canal and the tympanic
membrane with an otomicroscope to ascertain that in
fact the proximal end of the electrode rests against the
tympanic membrane, as shown in Figure 17–3. The use
of a small nasal or Lempert speculum is recommended,
as opposed to a standard ear speculum, to allow the
removal of the speculum without disturbing the electrode tip location on the tympanic membrane.
Once the electrode is visually confirmed to be in
place, the clinician needs to hold the distal end of the
electrode with a steady hand and remove the speculum, followed by the introduction of a standard foam
insert tip along the lead of the electrode. This stabilizes
the electrode in the ear canal and no further fixation
is necessary, except perhaps taping the extension lead
to the patient’s cheek so that there is no inadvertent
movement when it is in place. Contact with the tympanic membrane is further verified by examining the
electrode impedance. The typical impedance of such
electrodes ranges between 25 and 100 kΩ. This range
of impedances is acceptable and results in noise-free
recording. It is important to note that the impedance
measurement alone does not confirm or ascertain contact with the tympanic membrane. Contact with the
external ear canal can also result in low impedances;
therefore, it is necessary to both visualize the electrode
making contact with the tympanic membrane as well
as measuring its impedance. This technique is tolerated
well by patients. Approximately 25% to 30% of patients
report a brief episode of discomfort that some describe
as an earache that might occur during electrode placement. However, once the electrode and foam earplug
are in place, the discomfort goes away. The majority of
patients report a fullness sensation, a pressure sensation, as well as a dull sound when the electrode touches
the tympanic membrane. It is recommended to use
the pediatric version of the foam tip in most adult ear
canals, as the lead occupies some space within the ear
canal and the smaller pediatric tip is easier to place and
can be placed more medially in most ear canals.
17. ELECTROCOCHLEOGRAPHY (ECochG) 443
https://t.me/medicina_free
A
B
figure 17–3. A. Tympanic membrane electrode placement: right ear, patient
supine, microscope view using small nasal speculum. B.
ment of the tympanic membrane electrode, the speculum has been withdrawn.
Some fellow professionals recommend the use of
the tiptrode electrode option to record the ECochG,
stating that it is a reliable modality to record the SP
and the AP. This has not been our experience. The resolution of the response is not much better than when
recording with a reference electrode attached to the
medial surface of the earlobe. The presence and magnitude of the SP and the AP tend to be inconsistent and
variable. This is especially problematic when carrying
out follow-up evaluations to determine the efficacy
of a specific treatment, or monitoring the status of a
condition such as endolymphatic hydrops, or superior
semicircular canal dehiscence. Figure 17–4 illustrates
View following place-
the difference in response resolution and configuration between simultaneously recorded ECochGs with
a tympanic membrane electrode (top trace) and a tiptrode (bottom trace). These responses were obtained
simultaneously with a two-channel recording from the
same ear with identical recording parameters. While
the top trace recorded with a tympanic membrane electrode exhibits prominent and clearly identifiable SP
and AP components, the bottom trace obtained with
the tiptrode exhibits an overall reduced amplitude of
the AP, and an uncertain SP. It is interesting to note that
both traces exhibit identical wave V amplitudes. This
is not surprising, as relative to the neural generators
Соседние файлы в папке Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана