Role of vestibular input in triggering and modulating postural responses in unilateral and bilateral vestibular loss patients.

The aim of this study was to determine whether the greater medial-lateral (ML) instability observed in patients with compensated unilateral vestibular loss (UVL), tested on a seesaw platform with eyes closed, is task-dependent. UVL patients, categorized into three groups according to time since lesion (1 week, 1 month and 1 year), bilateral vestibular loss patients and age-matched healthy control subjects were tested in three dynamic postural tasks. These tasks involved different supports - a seesaw platform (Satel), a platform generating horizontal linear translations (Synapsys) and foam rubber placed on a static platform - each requiring different somatosensory cues to maintain equilibrium. Displacements of the subjects' center of pressure in both the anterior-posterior (AP) and ML directions were recorded by strain gauges within the platforms. Only tests performed with eyes closed were analyzed. Bilateral vestibular loss patients fell during foam and seesaw trials but not on the platform generating translations. We previously reported that UVL patients had greater postural oscillations on the seesaw platform in the ML compared to AP direction. In this study, we show similar ML/AP differences in patient performance on foam when standing with 'feet close together'. In contrast, these differences were not found when patients were tested on linear translation or on foam standing with feet apart. In conclusion, the postural performance of patients with vestibular loss depends on the exact task used to measure postural stability. UVL patients are less stable when subjected to movement in the ML direction because of the biomechanical constraints of the tasks and/or the availability of proprioceptive information.

Postural control in patients with unilateral vestibular lesions is more impaired in the roll than in the pitch plane: a static and dynamic posturography study.

The postural instability of patients with vestibular loss (11 with bilateral and 101 with unilateral vestibular loss) at different times following the lesion was investigated by means of posturography and compared to healthy subjects. In addition, subjects submitted to galvanic vestibular stimulation were also studied to compare their postural performances with those of patients with complete unilateral vestibular lesion. The platform consisted of a static computerized force platform, on which a seesaw platform could be placed to test the subjects in dynamic conditions. The displacement of the center of foot pressure was measured under different conditions: subjects standing on the fixed platform, eyes open and eyes closed and subjects standing on the seesaw platform, eyes open and eyes closed. In the last condition, balance was tested in the subject's pitch plane by allowing the platform to rotate forwards and backwards only and in the patient's roll plane by allowing the platform to rotate to the left and to the right. The results showed that in static conditions, only bilateral vestibular loss patients had abnormal values compared to controls. In contrast, in dynamic eyes-closed conditions, both bilateral and unilateral patients could be differentiated from controls. Bilateral patients were unable to stand up without falling in both pitch and roll planes. Unilateral patients fell in the first week following the lesion and exhibited increased postural oscillations in both planes from the 2-week up to the 1-year postlesion stage. In addition and more importantly, they fell more often or had higher sway in the roll than in the pitch plane. Therefore, this study suggests that dynamic posturography on a seesaw platform could be a valuable tool for clinical diagnosis and quantitative analysis of imbalance in patients suffering from a unilateral vestibular loss up to 1 year after the lesion.