Test-retest reliability of binaural simultaneous cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potential recording.

AIMS: The purpose of this study is to compare the test-retest reliability of cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potential (cVEMP) parameters between monaural sequential (mSEQ) cVEMP and binaural simultaneous (bSIM) cVEMP recordings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty two volunteers aged 22 from 38 years were enrolled. Two different methods of cVEMP measurement were performed in the subjects. The two methods were (1) monaural sequential (mSEQ) measurement and (2) binaural simultaneous (bSIM) measurement. After a mean test-retest interval of 7.1 ± 2.8 days, the second run of the cVEMP measurement was performed in a random order. To compare the test-retest reliability of mSEQ and bSIM cVEMP responses, Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Spearman correlation were applied. RESULTS: Both p13 and n23 latencies did not show a statistically significant difference between the two cVEMP recording methods. Also, there were no significant differences in the inter-peak amplitude (IPA) and interaural amplitude difference (IAD) ratio between the two methods. The test-retest reliability of inter-peak amplitude (IPA) demonstrated a positive correlation for both mSEQ and bSIM cVEMP methods. The IAD ratio of bSIM cVEMP response demonstrated a statistically significant test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.691, p= 0.015). However, the IAD ratio of mSEQ cVEMP response did not demonstrate a statistically significant test-retest correlation. CONCLUSION: Results implicate that bSIM cVEMP not only saves time, but it also has an advantage of a more reliable test-retest outcome.

Successful treatment of sudden sensorineural hearing loss assures improvement of accompanying tinnitus.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To investigate the long-term outcomes of accompanying tinnitus after steroid therapy for patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL). STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective chart review and survey. METHODS: Fifty patients diagnosed with SSNHL accompanied by tinnitus were enrolled and divided into two groups-satisfied and unsatisfied-according to the degree of improvement of tinnitus after SSNHL treatment. Subjective improvement of tinnitus and hearing status were investigated before and 6 months after SSNHL treatment. Hearing improvement was assessed using criteria from our previous study and Siegel's criteria. The change of tinnitus was assessed using a visual analogue scale for tinnitus intensity and frequency. RESULTS: Patients with more severe initial hearing loss had less chance of hearing recovery (P = .05). The satisfied group included significantly more cases with better hearing recovery after SSNHL treatment than the unsatisfied group (P = .049). Pure-tone threshold and speech discrimination scores were significantly better in the satisfied group than in the unsatisfied group after SSNHL treatment (P = .033 and P = .018, respectively), although the two groups showed no definitive differences before treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Optimal and successful treatment of SSNHL may be an important factor in obtaining favorable long-term control of tinnitus accompanied by SSNHL. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.