Cargando…

Video Suppression Head Impulses and Head Impulses Paradigms in Patients with Vestibular Neuritis: A Comparative Study

Background: This study aims to explore the clinical relevance of the Suppression Head Impulse Paradigm (SHIMP) to better understand if it represents an additional clinical value compared to the Head Impulse Paradigm (HIMP) in patients with vestibular neuritis (VN) in different stages of the disease....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Manzari, Leonardo, Orejel Bustos, Amaranta Soledad, Princi, Alessandro Antonio, Tramontano, Marco
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9601449/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36292373
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10101926
_version_ 1784817067978915840
author Manzari, Leonardo
Orejel Bustos, Amaranta Soledad
Princi, Alessandro Antonio
Tramontano, Marco
author_facet Manzari, Leonardo
Orejel Bustos, Amaranta Soledad
Princi, Alessandro Antonio
Tramontano, Marco
author_sort Manzari, Leonardo
collection PubMed
description Background: This study aims to explore the clinical relevance of the Suppression Head Impulse Paradigm (SHIMP) to better understand if it represents an additional clinical value compared to the Head Impulse Paradigm (HIMP) in patients with vestibular neuritis (VN) in different stages of the disease. Methods: From January 2020 to June 2022, patients with unilateral VN were found in a database of an ENT vestibular clinic. Clinical presentation, vestibular test outcomes, therapy, and recovery were examined in medical records. Results: A total of 42 patients (16 Females, mean age 51.06 ± 12.96; 26 Male, mean age 62.50 ± 9.82) met the inclusion criteria and were enrolled in the study. The means of the VOR gain for both paradigms were respectively 0.38 ± 0.12 (SHIMP) and 0.46 ± 0.13 (HIMP) at T0 and 0.55 ± 0.20 (SHIMP) and 0.64 ± 0.19 (HIMP) at T1 for the lesional side. For the HIMP, the gain value <0.76 identified the affected side of VN with 100% sensitivity (92–100) and 100% specificity (91–100). For the SHIMP, the gain value <0.66 identified the affected side of VN with 100% sensitivity (92–100) and 100% specificity (91–100) and an AUC of 1.0 (0.96–1.0, p < 0.0001). Conclusion: The SHIMP paradigm has a diagnostic accuracy equal to the classic HIMP paradigm in patients with VN. The assessment of VOR slow phase velocity and vestibulo-saccadic interaction in patients with VN could be easier with the use of the SHIMPs paradigm. SHIMPs paradigm provides helpful information about the evaluation of VOR slow phase velocity and vestibulo-saccadic interaction as new recovery strategies in patients with VN.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9601449
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96014492022-10-27 Video Suppression Head Impulses and Head Impulses Paradigms in Patients with Vestibular Neuritis: A Comparative Study Manzari, Leonardo Orejel Bustos, Amaranta Soledad Princi, Alessandro Antonio Tramontano, Marco Healthcare (Basel) Article Background: This study aims to explore the clinical relevance of the Suppression Head Impulse Paradigm (SHIMP) to better understand if it represents an additional clinical value compared to the Head Impulse Paradigm (HIMP) in patients with vestibular neuritis (VN) in different stages of the disease. Methods: From January 2020 to June 2022, patients with unilateral VN were found in a database of an ENT vestibular clinic. Clinical presentation, vestibular test outcomes, therapy, and recovery were examined in medical records. Results: A total of 42 patients (16 Females, mean age 51.06 ± 12.96; 26 Male, mean age 62.50 ± 9.82) met the inclusion criteria and were enrolled in the study. The means of the VOR gain for both paradigms were respectively 0.38 ± 0.12 (SHIMP) and 0.46 ± 0.13 (HIMP) at T0 and 0.55 ± 0.20 (SHIMP) and 0.64 ± 0.19 (HIMP) at T1 for the lesional side. For the HIMP, the gain value <0.76 identified the affected side of VN with 100% sensitivity (92–100) and 100% specificity (91–100). For the SHIMP, the gain value <0.66 identified the affected side of VN with 100% sensitivity (92–100) and 100% specificity (91–100) and an AUC of 1.0 (0.96–1.0, p < 0.0001). Conclusion: The SHIMP paradigm has a diagnostic accuracy equal to the classic HIMP paradigm in patients with VN. The assessment of VOR slow phase velocity and vestibulo-saccadic interaction in patients with VN could be easier with the use of the SHIMPs paradigm. SHIMPs paradigm provides helpful information about the evaluation of VOR slow phase velocity and vestibulo-saccadic interaction as new recovery strategies in patients with VN. MDPI 2022-09-30 /pmc/articles/PMC9601449/ /pubmed/36292373 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10101926 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Manzari, Leonardo
Orejel Bustos, Amaranta Soledad
Princi, Alessandro Antonio
Tramontano, Marco
Video Suppression Head Impulses and Head Impulses Paradigms in Patients with Vestibular Neuritis: A Comparative Study
title Video Suppression Head Impulses and Head Impulses Paradigms in Patients with Vestibular Neuritis: A Comparative Study
title_full Video Suppression Head Impulses and Head Impulses Paradigms in Patients with Vestibular Neuritis: A Comparative Study
title_fullStr Video Suppression Head Impulses and Head Impulses Paradigms in Patients with Vestibular Neuritis: A Comparative Study
title_full_unstemmed Video Suppression Head Impulses and Head Impulses Paradigms in Patients with Vestibular Neuritis: A Comparative Study
title_short Video Suppression Head Impulses and Head Impulses Paradigms in Patients with Vestibular Neuritis: A Comparative Study
title_sort video suppression head impulses and head impulses paradigms in patients with vestibular neuritis: a comparative study
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9601449/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36292373
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10101926
work_keys_str_mv AT manzarileonardo videosuppressionheadimpulsesandheadimpulsesparadigmsinpatientswithvestibularneuritisacomparativestudy
AT orejelbustosamarantasoledad videosuppressionheadimpulsesandheadimpulsesparadigmsinpatientswithvestibularneuritisacomparativestudy
AT princialessandroantonio videosuppressionheadimpulsesandheadimpulsesparadigmsinpatientswithvestibularneuritisacomparativestudy
AT tramontanomarco videosuppressionheadimpulsesandheadimpulsesparadigmsinpatientswithvestibularneuritisacomparativestudy