Investigating Performance of cVEMP and oVEMP in the Identification of Superior Canal Dehiscence in Relation to Dehiscence Location and Size

Compare the sensitivity and specificity of cVEMP (500 Hz), oVEMP (500 Hz and 4 kHz) in the identification of SSCD. A secondary objective was to identify the influence of dehiscence size and location on cVEMP and oVEMP responses. Methods: Individuals with unilateral (n = 16) and bilateral (n = 10) scan confirmed SSCD were assessed using air-conducted cVEMP and oVEMP Results: For cVEMP, an amplitude cutoff of 286.9 μV or a threshold cutoff of 67.5 dBnHL revealed, respectively, a sensitivity of 75% and 70.6% and a specificity of 69.4% and 100%. For oVEMP (500 Hz), an amplitude cutoff of 10.8 μV or a threshold cutoff of 77.5 dBnHL revealed a sensitivity of 83.33% and a specificity of 87.5% and 80%, respectively. oVEMP (4 kHz), an amplitude cutoff of 3.1 μV, revealed a high specificity of 100% but a low sensitivity of 47.2%. A positive correlation was noted between the length of the SSCD and the cVEMP and oVEMP (500 Hz) thresholds and cVEMP amplitude. Conclusions: Our results support the use of oVEMP in the identification of SSCD. The presence of oVEMP (500 Hz) with an amplitude higher or equal to 10.8 μV, a threshold lower or equal to 77.5 dBnHL or oVEMP (4 kHz) amplitude of 3.1 μV represents the most useful to identify SSCD.

Pulse-synchronous torsional nystagmus

Purely torsional spontaneous nystagmus almost always has a central vestibular cause. We describe a man with spontaneous pulse-synchronous torsional nystagmus in which the clockwise component corresponded to his pulse upswing, in keeping with a peripheral vestibular cause; following imaging we diagnosed left-sided superior canal dehiscence syndrome. Identifying pulse synchronicity of spontaneous nystagmus may help to distinguish central from peripheral vestibular torsional nystagmus, and is readily confirmed at the bedside using Frenzel’s glasses and a pulse oximeter.

Current Trends, Controversies, and Future Directions in the Evaluation and Management of Superior Canal Dehiscence Syndrome

Patients with superior canal dehiscence syndrome (SCDS) can present with a range of auditory and/or vestibular signs and symptoms that are associated with a bony defect of the superior semicircular canal (SSC). Over the past two decades, advances in diagnostic techniques have raised the awareness of SCDS and treatment approaches have been refined to improve patient outcomes. However, a number of challenges remain. First, there is currently no standardized clinical testing algorithm for quantifying the effects of superior canal dehiscence (SCD). SCDS mimics a number of common otologic disorders and established metrics such as supranormal bone conduction thresholds and vestibular evoked myogenic potential (VEMP) measurements; although useful in certain cases, have diagnostic limitations. Second, while high-resolution computed tomography (CT) is the gold standard for the detection of SCD, a bony defect does not always result in signs and symptoms. Third, even when SCD repair is indicated, there is a lack of consensus about nomenclature to describe the SCD, ideal surgical approach, specific repair techniques, and type of materials used. Finally, there is no established algorithm in evaluation of SCDS patients who fail primary repair and may be candidates for revision surgery. Herein, we will discuss both contemporary and emerging diagnostic approaches for patients with SCDS and highlight challenges and controversies in the management of this unique patient cohort.