Hostname: page-component-669899f699-g7b4s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-05T22:51:41.392Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Vestibular function in probable versus definite Ménière’s disease: a cross-sectional retrospective analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 April 2025

Oğulcan Gündoğdu*
Affiliation:
Department of Audiology, Institute of Health Sciences, Istanbul University-Cerrahpasa, Istanbul, Turkey
Cem Yeral
Affiliation:
Department of Audiology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey
Ayberk Aydın Tunc
Affiliation:
Department of Audiology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey
Berna Özge Mutlu
Affiliation:
Department of Audiology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey
Handan Yaman
Affiliation:
Department of Audiology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey
Oğuz Yılmaz
Affiliation:
Department of Audiology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey
*
Corresponding author: Oğulcan Gündoğdu; Email: [email protected]

Abstract

Objectives

Ménière’s disease is an inner-ear disorder caused by endolymphatic hydrops, characterised by recurrent episodes of vertigo, fluctuating hearing loss, and tinnitus. Ménière’s disease can be classified as ‘probable’ and ‘definite’ according to the criteria determined by the Bárány Society.

Methods

This analytical cross-sectional retrospective study included 28 Ménière’s disease patients (15 with definite Ménière’s disease and 13 with probable Ménière’s disease). Vestibular function was assessed using ocular-vestibular evoked myogenic potentials, cervical-vestibular evoked myogenic potentials and caloric test.

Results

The results of these tests were evaluated separately for probable Ménière’s disease and definite Ménière’s disease groups and comparisons were made. Significant differences in vestibular evoked myogenic potential asymmetry rates were observed between the probable Ménière’s disease and definite Ménière’s disease groups, with the definite Ménière’s disease group exhibiting a higher rate of abnormal responses.

Conclusion

This suggests that vestibular evoked myogenic potentials testing may be a valuable tool in distinguishing between these two subtypes of Ménière’s disease. Further research is necessary to validate these findings and explore their implications for clinical practice.

Type
Main Article
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of J.L.O. (1984) LIMITED.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

Oğulcan Gündoğdu takes responsibility for the integrity of the content of the paper

References

Kitano, K, Kitahara, T, Ito, T, Shiozaki, T, Wada, Y, Yamanaka, T. Results in caloric test, video head impulse test and inner ear MRI in patients with Ménière’s disease. Auris Nasus Larynx 2020;47:71–8Google Scholar
Canale, A, Caranzano, F, Lanotte, M, Ducati, A, Calamo, F, Albera, A, et al. Comparison of VEMPs, VHIT and caloric test outcomes after vestibular neurectomy in Menière’s disease. Auris Nasus Larynx 2018;45:1159–65Google Scholar
Koenen, L, Andaloro, C. StatPearls: Meniere Disease, 24th Edn. Treasure Island, Florida, StatPearls Publishing, 2023Google Scholar
Lopez-Escamez, JA, Carey, J, Chung, W-H, Goebel, JA, Magnusson, M, Mandalà, M, et al. Diagnostic criteria for Menière’s disease. J Vestib Res 2015;25:17Google Scholar
Egami, N, Ushio, M, Yamasoba, T, Yamaguchi, T, Murofushi, T, Iwasaki, S. The diagnostic value of vestibular evoked myogenic potentials in patients with Meniere’s disease. J Vestib Res 2013;23:249–57Google Scholar
Huang, C-H, Wang, S-J, Young, Y-H. Correlation between caloric and ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potential test results. Acta Otolaryngol 2012;132:160–6Google Scholar
Taha, HM, Nada, I, Alagamy, MM, Rahman, TTA. Clinical correlates of different forms of endolymphatic hydrops. Egypt J Otolaryngol 2022;38:10Google Scholar
Goebel, JA. 2015 Equilibrium Committee amendment to the 1995 AAO–HNS Guidelines for the definition of Ménière’s disease. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2016;154:403–4Google Scholar
Chen, J-Y, Guo, Z-Q, Wang, J, Liu, D, Tian, E, Guo, J-Q, et al. Vestibular migraine or Meniere’s disease: a diagnostic dilemma. J Neurol 2023;270:1955–68Google Scholar
Taylor, RL, Zagami, AS, Gibson, WP, Black, DA, Watson, SR, Halmagyi, MG, et al. Vestibular evoked myogenic potentials to sound and vibration: characteristics in vestibular migraine that enable separation from Meniere’s disease. Cephalalgia 2012;32:213–25Google Scholar
Salviz, M, Yuce, T, Acar, H, Taylan, I, Yuceant, GA, Karatas, A. Diagnostic value of vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials in Ménière’s disease and vestibular migraine. J Vestib Res 2016;25:261–6Google Scholar
Tamanini, JB, Mezzalira, R, Vallim, MGB, Gabriel, GP, Stoler, G, Chone, CT. Dissociation between video head impulse test and caloric test: a marker of Menière’s disease? – A systematic review and meta-analysis. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2023;89:101279Google Scholar
Limviriyakul, S, Luangsawang, C, Suvansit, K, Prakairungthong, S, Thongyai, K, Atipas, S. Video head impulse test and caloric test in definite Ménière’s disease. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2020;277:679–86Google Scholar
Xie, J, Zhang, W, Zhu, J, Hui, L, Li, S, Ren, L, et al. Differential diagnosis of endolymphatic hydrops between “probable” and “definite” Ménière’s disease via magnetic resonance imaging. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2021;165:696700Google Scholar
van Tilburg, MJ, Herrmann, BS, JJ, Guinan Jr, Rauch, SD. Serial cVEMP testing is sensitive to disease progression in Ménière patients. Otol Neurotol 2016;37:1614–19Google Scholar
Sobhy, OA, Elmoazen, DM, Abd-Elbaky, FA. Towards a new staging of Ménière’s disease: a vestibular approach. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital 2019;39:419–28Google Scholar