Both sound (s-) and galvanic (g-) vestibular-evoked myogenic potential (VEMP) enable us to study the saccular pathways. However, the VEMP can be abnormal for non-vestibular factors, such as insufficient activation of the sterno-cleido-mastoid (SCM) muscle or a lesion that involves the accessory nucleus and/or nerve or the SCM muscle. These drawbacks do not affect another technique that evaluates the saccular function: the N3 potential. We recorded both the s- and the g-VEMP and the N3 potential in a group of 31 healthy subjects to establish a reference range. The N3 potential and the s-VEMP were recordable bilaterally from all the subjects, whereas the g-VEMP was undetectable uni- or bilaterally in 7 subjects. The latency and amplitude values of the s-VEMP did not differ from those of the g-VEMP. For all three techniques, the latency and amplitude values from the right and from the left recording and/or stimulation side were the same. We suggest using normative latency and amplitude values based on the mean and ratio of the right- and left-side values. The s-VEMP, the N3 potential and the auditory evoked response (ABR) were compared in 15 subjects suffering from multiple sclerosis. The three techniques detected a similar number of abnormalities, but these abnormalities were not correlated. This suggests that these different techniques should be regarded as complementary in evaluating saccular function.
The N3 potential compared to sound and galvanic vestibular evoked myogenic potential in healthy subjects and in multiple sclerosis patients
VERSINO, MAURIZIO;
2007-01-01
Abstract
Both sound (s-) and galvanic (g-) vestibular-evoked myogenic potential (VEMP) enable us to study the saccular pathways. However, the VEMP can be abnormal for non-vestibular factors, such as insufficient activation of the sterno-cleido-mastoid (SCM) muscle or a lesion that involves the accessory nucleus and/or nerve or the SCM muscle. These drawbacks do not affect another technique that evaluates the saccular function: the N3 potential. We recorded both the s- and the g-VEMP and the N3 potential in a group of 31 healthy subjects to establish a reference range. The N3 potential and the s-VEMP were recordable bilaterally from all the subjects, whereas the g-VEMP was undetectable uni- or bilaterally in 7 subjects. The latency and amplitude values of the s-VEMP did not differ from those of the g-VEMP. For all three techniques, the latency and amplitude values from the right and from the left recording and/or stimulation side were the same. We suggest using normative latency and amplitude values based on the mean and ratio of the right- and left-side values. The s-VEMP, the N3 potential and the auditory evoked response (ABR) were compared in 15 subjects suffering from multiple sclerosis. The three techniques detected a similar number of abnormalities, but these abnormalities were not correlated. This suggests that these different techniques should be regarded as complementary in evaluating saccular function.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.