Search

Background/Objectives : Chronic unilateral vestibular hypofunction (UVH) can lead to disabling vestibular symptoms and a decrease in quality of life. The aim of this study was to investigate etiologies, clinical subtypes, symptoms, and quality of life (QoL) in patients with chronic UVH. Methods : A retrospective study was performed on 251 UVH patients in a tertiary referral center. Inclusion criteria comprised reduced or absent caloric responses, with a caloric asymmetry ratio ≥25%. Patients with central vestibular pathology, symptom duration <3 months, and incomplete responses to questionnaires were excluded. Patient records were assessed for etiologies, secondary vestibular diagnoses, clinical subtypes, and questionnaires related to QoL. Additionally, multiple linear regression analysis was performed to evaluate factors influencing QoL. Results : Thirteen different etiologies were identified, with Menière's Disease as the most prevalent (31%, n = 79). The most frequently reported secondary vestibular diagnoses were benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV) (21%, n = 54) and persistent postural perceptual dizziness (PPPD) (19%, n = 47). Five distinct clinical subtypes were identified: recurrent vertigo with UVH (47%), rapidly progressive UVH (25%), idiopathic/unknown UVH (18%), slowly progressive UVH (8%), and congenital UVH (2%). Over 80% of UVH patients experienced moderate-to-severe handicap, as indicated by the Dizziness Handicap Inventory. Approximately 20-25% of UVH patients exhibited moderate-to-severe depression and anxiety, based on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Multiple linear regression analyses demonstrated that the presence of PPPD significantly reduced QoL in chronic UVH patients. Conclusions : Chronic UVH is a heterogeneous disorder. Secondary vestibular diagnoses like BPPV and PPPD often co-exist and can significantly impact QoL. A structured diagnostic approach and tailored interventions are crucial to address the diverse needs of UVH patients.

Background: DFNA9 is a genetic disease of the inner ear, causing progressive bilateral sensorineural deafness and bilateral vestibulopathy (BV). In this study, DizzyQuest, a mobile vestibular diary, and the MOX accelerometer were combined to assess the daily life functional limitations and physical activity of patients with DFNA9 suffering from BV. These parameters might be appropriate as potential candidacy criteria and outcome measures for new therapeutic interventions for BV., Methods: Fifteen DFNA9 patients with BV and twelve age-matched healthy controls were included. The DizzyQuest was applied for six consecutive days, which assessed the participants' extent of functional limitations, tiredness, types of activities performed during the day, and type of activity during which the participant felt most limited. The MOX accelerometer was worn during the same six days of DizzyQuest use, measuring the participants intensity and type of physical activity. Mixed-effects linear and logistic regression analyses were performed to compare the DFNA9 patients and control group., Results: DFNA9 patients with BV felt significantly more limited in activities during the day compared to the age-matched controls, especially in social participation ( p < 0.005). However, these reported limitations did not cause adjustment in the types of activities and did not reduce the intensity or type of physical activity measured with accelerometry. In addition, no relationships were found between self-reported functional limitations and physical activity., Conclusions: This study demonstrated that self-reported functional limitations are significantly higher among DFNA9 patients with BV. As a result, these limitations might be considered as part of the candidacy criteria or outcome measures for therapeutic interventions. In addition, the intensity or type of physical activity performed during the day need to be addressed more specifically in future research.

The Suppression Head Impulse (SHIMP) test was introduced as an alternative to the Head Impulse Paradigm (HIMP) to overcome challenges in VOR gain calculation due to the interference of covert saccades. The objectives of this study were (1) to determine if SHIMP, compared to HIMP, reduces covert saccades in BV patients and (2) to define the agreement on diagnosing BV between SHIMP and HIMP. First, the number of covert saccades was compared between SHIMP and HIMP. Secondly, VOR gain was compared between SHIMP and HIMP. Lastly, the agreement between SHIMP and HIMP on identifying BV (horizontal VOR gain <0.6) was evaluated. A total of 98 BV patients were included. To our knowledge, this is the largest study population on SHIMP testing in BV patients. Covert saccades were significantly reduced, and a lower VOR gain was found during SHIMP compared to HIMP (p < 0.001). However, the clinical relevance of these statistically significant differences is small. In 93% of the patients, an agreement was found between the two paradigms regarding the diagnosis of BV, and both paradigms detect BV in the vast majority of patients.

History taking is crucial in the diagnostic process for vestibular disorders. To facilitate the process, systems such as TiTrATE, SO STONED, and DISCOHAT have been used to describe the different paradigms; together, they address the most important aspects of history taking, viz. time course, triggers, and accompanying symptoms. However, multiple (vestibular) disorders may co-occur in the same patient. This complicates history taking, since the time course, triggers, and accompanying symptoms can vary, depending on the disorder. History taking can, therefore, be improved by addressing the important aspects of each co-occurring vestibular disorder separately. The aim of this document is to describe a 4-step approach for improving history taking in patients with non-acute vestibular symptoms, by guiding the clinician and the patient through the history taking process. It involves a systematic approach that explicitly identifies all co-occurring vestibular disorders in the same patient, and which addresses each of these vestibular disorders separately. The four steps are: (1) describing any attack(s) of vertigo and/or dizziness; (2) describing any chronic vestibular symptoms; (3) screening for functional, psychological, and psychiatric co-morbidity; (4) establishing a comprehensive diagnosis, including all possible co-occurring (vestibular) disorders. In addition, pearls and pitfalls will be discussed separately for each step.