Dissociation between video head impulse test and caloric test: a marker of menière's disease? – A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE: To analyze, by means of a systematic review and meta-analysis, the proportion of patients with Meniere’s disease who have altered caloric test and vHIT, as well as to determine the prevalence of altered caloric test and normal vHIT dissociation in the diagnosis of Meniere’s disease. METHODS: The literature search had no restriction regarding the period of publication on the following indexed data platforms: PubMed, PubMed PMC, BVS-Bireme, Web of Science, Embase and Cochrane Library. Articles that evaluated patients with Meniere’s disease who underwent caloric test and vHIT were included. Two researchers independently conducted the analysis of the articles, promoting the selection and capture of data, following the recommendations of the PRISMA method, and complying with the criteria for articles inclusion and exclusion defined in the research protocol. In case of disagreement during the selection process, a third researcher was included for analysis. RESULTS: From a total of 427 initial studies, the researchers selected 12 articles, published between 2014 and 2021, with a total of 708 patients evaluated, with a mean age of 52.72 years old. The prevalence of patients with Meniere’s disease with altered caloric reflex test was 64% (95% CI 57%‒71%), while the prevalence of altered vHIT was only 28% (95% CI 16%–40%). The prevalence of the altered caloric test + normal vHIT dissociation was 47% (95% CI 37%–57%). CONCLUSION: The video head impulse test and the caloric test are valuable tools for vestibular assessment. The dissociation of findings between these two tests in patients with Meniere’s disease was more prevalent in this meta-analysis and may be a result of the tonotopy of specialized hair cells in the ampullary crest. The prevalence of altered caloric test was 64% and anormal vHIT was 28%. The dissociation caloric asymmetry and normal vHIT was observed in 47% of the patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1.