No abstract

Background and Purpose Conflicting results about vestibular function in progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) prompted a systematic examination of the semicircular canal function, otolith function, and postural stability. Methods Sixteen patients with probable PSP [9 females, age=72±6 years (mean±SD), mean disease duration=3.6 years, and mean PSP Rating Scale score=31] and 17 age-matched controls were examined using the video head impulse test, caloric testing, ocular and cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potentials (o- and cVEMPs), video-oculography, and posturography. Results There was no evidence of impaired function of the angular vestibulo-ocular reflex (gain=1.0±0.1), and caloric testing also produced normal findings. In terms of otolith function, there was no significant difference between PSP patients and controls in the absolute peakto-peak amplitude of the oVEMP (13.5±7.2 µV and 12.5±5.6 µV, respectively; p =0.8) or the corrected peak-to-peak amplitude of the cVEMP (0.6±0.3 µV and 0.5±0.2 µV, p =0.3). The total root-mean-square body sway was significantly increased in patients with PSP compared to controls (eyes open/head straight/hard platform: 9.3±3.7 m/min and 6.9±2.1 m/min, respectively; p =0.032). As expected, the saccade velocities were significantly lower in PSP patients than in controls: horizontal, 234±92°/sec and 442±66°/sec, respectively; downward, 109±105°/sec and 344±72°/sec; and upward, 121±110°/sec and 348±78°/sec (all p <0.01). Conclusions We found no evidence of impairment of either high- or low-frequency semicircular function or otolith organ function in the examined PSP patients. It therefore appears that other causes such as degeneration of supratentorial pathways lead to postural imbalance and falls in patients with PSP.

BackgroundMaking the correct diagnosis of patients presenting with vertigo and dizziness in clinical practice is often challenging.ObjectiveIn this study we examined the performance of the iPad based program medx in the prediction of different clinical vertigo and dizziness diagnoses and as a diagnostic tool to distinguish between them.Patients and methodsThe data collection was done in the outpatient clinic of the German Center of Vertigo and Balance Disorders. The “gold standard diagnosis” was defined as the clinical diagnosis of the specialist during the visit of the patient based on standardized history and clinical examination. Another independent and blinded physician finalized each patient’s case in the constellatory diagnostic system of medx based on an algorithm using all available clinical information. These diagnoses were compared to the “gold standard” by retrospective review of the charts of the patients. The accuracy provided by medx was defined as the number of correctly classified diagnoses. In addition, the probability of being test positive when a disease was present (sensitivity), of being test negative when a disease was absent (specificity), of having the disease when the test is positive (positive predictive value) and of not having the disease when the test is negative (negative predictive value) for the most common diagnoses were reported. Sixteen possible different vertigo and dizziness diagnoses could be provided by medx.ResultsA total of 610 patients (mean age 58.1 ± 16.3 years, 51.2% female) were included. The accuracy for the most common diagnoses was between 82.1 and 96.6% with a sensitivity of 40 to 80.5% and a specificity of more than 80%. When analyzing the quality of medx in a multiclass problem for the six most common clinical diagnoses, the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were as follows: Bilateral vestibulopathy (81.6, 97.1, 71.1, and 97.5%), Menière’s disease (77.8, 97.6, 87.0, and 95.3%), benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (61.7, 98.3, 86.6, and 93.4%), downbeat nystagmus syndrome (69.6, 97.7, 71.1, and 97.5%), vestibular migraine (34.7, 97.8, 76.1, and 88.3%), and phobic postural vertigo (80.5, 82.5, 52.5, and 94.6%).ConclusionThis study demonstrates that medx is a new and easy approach to screen for different diagnoses. With the high specificity and negative predictive value, the system helps to rule out differential diagnoses and can therefore also lead to a cost reduction in the health care system. However, the sensitivity was unexpectedly low, especially for vestibular migraine. All in all, this device can only be a complementary tool, in particular for non-experts in the field.

Objective: To compare the efficacy of the Sémont maneuver (SM) with the new “SémontPLUS maneuver” (SM+) in patients with posterior canal BPPV canalolithiasis (pcBPPVcan).Methods and Patients: In a prospective trinational (Germany, Italy, and Belgium) randomized trial, patients with pcBPPVcan were randomly assigned to SM or SM+; SM+ means overextension of the head by 60+° below earth horizontal line during the movement of the patient toward the affected side. The first maneuver was done by the physician, and the subsequent maneuvers by the patients 9 times/day on their own. Each morning the patient documented whether vertigo could be induced. The primary endpoints were: “How long (in days) does it take until no attacks can be induced?” and “What is the efficacy of a single SM/SM+?”Results: In the 194 patients analyzed (96 SM, 98 SM+), it took 2 days (median, range 1–21 days, mean 3.6 days) for recovery with SM and 1 day (median, range 1-8 days, mean 1.8 days) with SM+ (p = 0.001, Mann-Whitney U-test). There was no difference in the second primary endpoint (chi2-test, p = 0.39).Interpretation: This prospective trial shows that SM+ is more effective than SM when repeated therapeutic maneuvers are performed but not when a single maneuver is performed. It also supports the hypothesis of the biophysical model: overextension of the head during step 2 brings the clot of otoconia beyond the vertex of the canal, which increases the effectivity.Classification of Evidence: This study provides Class I evidence that SM+ is superior to SM for multiple treatment maneuvers of pcBPPVcan.