Shepard, Neil T.

ImportanceVestibular migraine has no established treatments.ObjectiveTo test the efficacy of rizatriptan for treating vestibular migraine attacks.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis double-blind, randomized clinical trial of rizatriptan vs placebo was conducted from December 2014 through July 2020 (data analyses in 2021 and sensitivity analyses in 2022 and 2024) at 2 tertiary neurotologic centers. Adults with vestibular migraine were included.InterventionAll participants underwent prospective observation to confirm diagnosis and illness activity and were then randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive rizatriptan 10 mg or placebo to treat up to 3 vestibular migraine attacks per participant.Main Outcomes and MeasuresParticipants rated symptoms as absent, mild, moderate, or severe at scheduled intervals. Primary outcomes were the percentage of attacks with reductions in vertigo and unsteadiness/dizziness from moderate or severe to absent or mild at 1 hour. Secondary outcomes were the percentage of attacks with complete resolution of vestibular symptoms at 1 hour; reductions in headache and associated symptoms at 1 hour; use of rescue medications after 1 hour; reductions in vestibular, headache, and associated symptoms at 24 hours without rescue medications; treatment satisfaction and quality of life at 48 hours; and rates of serious adverse effects and discontinuation due to adverse effects.ResultsOf 222 total participants (mean [SD] age, 42.3 [11.7] years; 70.7% were women), 134 (60.4%) with active illness treated 307 attacks. Efficacy was tested using 240 attacks with vestibular symptoms rated as moderate or severe when participants took study drug. At 1 hour, rizatriptan did not differ from placebo for reducing vertigo (73/151 [48.3%] vs 50/88 [56.8%] attacks; odds ratio [OR], 0.71 [95% CI, 0.42-1.21]), unsteadiness/dizziness (29/151 [19.2%] vs 11/89 [12.4%] attacks; OR, 1.69 [95% CI, 0.80-3.57]), or any secondary outcomes. Similar percentages of participants in rizatriptan and placebo groups (26.4% for both groups) added rescue remedies after 1 hour. At 24 hours, rizatriptan had medium effects over placebo for unsteadiness/dizziness (OR, 2.65) and motion sensitivity (OR, 3.58). Post hoc analyses of all treated attacks found a medium effect favoring rizatriptan for headache and photophobia or phonophobia at 24 hours. Treatment satisfaction was equivocal. Quality of life was mixed. No participants experienced serious adverse effects or discontinued treatment for adverse effects.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this study, rizatriptan was ineffective at 1 hour for treating vestibular migraine attacks and had limited benefit on symptoms at 24 hours. Findings do not support using rizatriptan for vestibular migraine attacks.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02447991

AbstractObjectiveTo report the first steps of a project to automate and optimize scheduling of multidisciplinary consultations for patients with longstanding dizziness utilizing artificial intelligence.Study DesignRetrospective case review.SettingQuaternary referral center.MethodsA previsit self‐report questionnaire was developed to query patients about their complaints of longstanding dizziness. We convened an expert panel of clinicians to review diagnostic outcomes for 98 patients and used a consensus approach to retrospectively determine what would have been the ideal appointments based on the patient's final diagnoses. These results were then compared retrospectively to the actual patient schedules. From these data, a machine learning algorithm was trained and validated to automate the triage process.ResultsCompared with the ideal itineraries determined retrospectively with our expert panel, visits scheduled by the triage clinicians showed a mean concordance of 70%, and our machine learning algorithm triage showed a mean concordance of 79%.ConclusionManual triage by clinicians for dizzy patients is a time‐consuming and costly process. The formulated first‐generation automated triage algorithm achieved similar results to clinicians when triaging dizzy patients using data obtained directly from an online previsit questionnaire.

Purpose In this introduction, the author introduces the reader to two articles that cover the basic area of vestibular and balance rehabilitation therapy (VBRT). The articles explain some of the uses of VBRT but not the techniques of how to establish such a program for a patient with dizziness and balance disorders. Conclusion The audiologist needs to be familiar with the various uses of VBRT and the techniques for identification and treatment of benign paroxysmal positional vertigo. However, without the audiologist undergoing further specific musculoskeletal training, the remainder of VBRT should occur in the physical therapy arena.

PurposeMénière's disease (MD) is a constellation of otologic symptoms that includes aural fullness, tinnitus, hearing loss, and episodic vertigo. Even though the criteria for diagnosing the disorder was set forth in 1972, the causes are still not well understood. The purpose of this study was to describe the relationships between tests of hearing and vestibular function and length of time patients diagnosed with unilateral MD have experienced symptoms.MethodThe charts of 254 patients with definite unilateral MD from the Mayo Clinic database were retrospectively reviewed. In order to be included, patients must have reported active MD diagnosis within the previous 5 years. Main outcome measures were results for audiometry, cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potentials, ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potentials, caloric test findings, video head impulse test, and sinusoidal harmonic acceleration.ResultsResults indicate there is a significant effect of the duration of MD symptoms reported by the patient and findings on some tests of hearing and vestibular function. Specifically, pure-tone average, caloric paresis, and rotational chair phase were all positively correlated with duration of symptoms. Rotational chair gain was found to have an inverse relationship with time. We did not find that video head impulse test gain or certain vestibular evoked myogenic potential measures were significantly correlated with the reported duration of patient symptoms.ConclusionsOur results suggest that, although the duration of symptoms reported by the patient does correlate with a number of vestibular and hearing tests, the relationships are relatively weak. The number of attacks and severity of symptoms should be investigated to determine if they are better predictors of laboratory testing results in the patient with MD.

A growing body of clinical and epidemiological evidence supports a specific relationship between vestibular symptoms and migraine. Without a biomarker or complete understanding of pathophysiology, diagnosis of vestibular migraine (VM) currently depends upon symptoms in two dimensions: episodic vestibular symptoms temporally related to migraine symptoms. The Bárány Society and the International Headache Society have recently developed consensus diagnostic criteria. However, many issues remain unsettled, including the type, duration, and timing of vestibular symptoms related to headache that should be required for diagnosing VM. This paper focuses on the challenging third dimension of comorbidity, a frequent cause of diagnostic uncertainty that may confound clinical application and research validation of VM criteria. Several other neurotologic conditions occur more frequently in migraineurs than controls, including benign paroxysmal positional vertigo, Ménière's disease, and motion sickness. Patients with VM also have high rates of chronic subjective dizziness, which may be associated with anxious, introverted temperaments that can affect clinical presentation and treatment response. Broadly inclusive studies of well-characterized patients with other neurotologic and psychiatric comorbidities are needed to fully understand how vestibular symptoms and migraine interact in order to truly validate vestibular migraine, distill its essential features, define its boundaries, and characterize overlapping comorbidities.

Adequate function of the peripheral vestibular system, specifically the vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR; a network of neural connections between the peripheral vestibular system and the extraocular muscles) is essential for maintaining stable vision during head movements. Decreased visual acuity resulting from an impaired peripheral vestibular system may impede balance and postural control and place an individual at risk of falling. Therefore, sensitive measures of the vestibular system are warranted to screen for the tendency to fall, alerting clinicians to recommend further risk of falling assessment and referral to a falling risk reduction program. Dynamic Visual Acuity (DVA) testing is a computerized VOR assessment method to evaluate the peripheral vestibular system during head movements; reduced visual acuity as documented with DVA testing may be sensitive to screen for falling risk. This study examined the sensitivity and specificity of the computerized DVA test with yaw plane head movements for identifying community-dwelling adults (58–78 years) who are prone to falling. A total of 16 older adults with a history of two or more unexplained falls in the previous twelve months and 16 age and gender matched controls without a history of falls in the previous twelve months participated. Computerized DVA with horizontal head movements at a fixed velocity of 120 deg/sec was measured and compared with the Dynamic Gait Index (DGI) a gold standard gait assessment measurement for identifying falling risk. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analysis and area under the ROC curve (AUC) were used to assess the sensitivity and specificity of the computerized DVA as a screening measure for falling risk as determined by the DGI. Results suggested a link between computerized DVA and the propensity to fall; DVA in the yaw plane was found to be a sensitive (92%) and accurate screening measure when using a cutoff logMAR value of > 0.25.

Impairments of the vestibular-ocular reflex (VOR) lead to a decline in visual acuity during head movements. Dynamic visual acuity (DVA) testing is a sensitive assessment tool for detecting VOR impairments. DVA evaluates accuracy of visual acuity during fixed velocity head movements. In contrast, the Gaze Stabilization test (GST) is a new functional evaluation of the VOR that identifies a person's maximum head velocity (in degrees per second) a person can maintain with stable vision of a target (i.e. optotype). The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of age on the GST in participants without vestibular disease. The study was conducted in a vestibular and balance laboratory at a tertiary medical center. A total of 87 healthy adult volunteers were included in this study. The main outcome measure was the association between age and both GST maximum head velocity in the yaw (right/left) plane and velocity symmetry. A significant negative correlation was found between age and maximum head velocity (r =−0.469, p< 0.001). Our results suggest that age should be considered when interpreting GST results in the yaw plane, however standardization of testing methods should be established as variation in results has been reported in the literature.

Abstract FACIAL NERVE MONITORING Question 1 Does intraoperative facial nerve monitoring during vestibular schwannoma surgery lead to better long-term facial nerve function? Target Population This recommendation applies to adult patients undergoing vestibular schwannoma surgery regardless of tumor characteristics. Recommendation Level 3: It is recommended that intraoperative facial nerve monitoring be routinely utilized during vestibular schwannoma surgery to improve long-term facial nerve function. Question 2 Can intraoperative facial nerve monitoring be used to accurately predict favorable long-term facial nerve function after vestibular schwannoma surgery? Target Population This recommendation applies to adult patients undergoing vestibular schwannoma surgery. Recommendation Level 3: Intraoperative facial nerve can be used to accurately predict favorable long-term facial nerve function after vestibular schwannoma surgery. Specifically, the presence of favorable testing reliably portends a good long-term facial nerve outcome. However, the absence of favorable testing in the setting of an anatomically intact facial nerve does not reliably predict poor long-term function and therefore cannot be used to direct decision-making regarding the need for early reinnervation procedures. Question 3 Does an anatomically intact facial nerve with poor electromyogram (EMG) electrical responses during intraoperative testing reliably predict poor long-term facial nerve function? Target Population This recommendation applies to adult patients undergoing vestibular schwannoma surgery. Recommendation Level 3: Poor intraoperative EMG electrical response of the facial nerve should not be used as a reliable predictor of poor long-term facial nerve function. COCHLEAR NERVE MONITORING Question 4 Should intraoperative eighth cranial nerve monitoring be used during vestibular schwannoma surgery? Target Population This recommendation applies to adult patients undergoing vestibular schwannoma surgery with measurable preoperative hearing levels and tumors smaller than 1.5 cm. Recommendation Level 3: Intraoperative eighth cranial nerve monitoring should be used during vestibular schwannoma surgery when hearing preservation is attempted. Question 5 Is direct monitoring of the eighth cranial nerve superior to the use of far-field auditory brain stem responses? Target Population This recommendation applies to adult patients undergoing vestibular schwannoma surgery with measurable preoperative hearing levels and tumors smaller than 1.5 cm. Recommendation Level 3: There is insufficient evidence to make a definitive recommendation. The full guideline can be found at: https://www.cns.org/guidelines/guidelines-manage-ment-patients-vestibular-schwannoma/chapter_4.

Abstract Please see the full-text version of this guideline (https://www.cns.org/guidelines/guidelines-management-patients-vestibular-schwannoma/chapter_3) for the target population of each recommendation listed below. STEREOTACTIC RADIOSURGERY Question 1 What is the overall probability of maintaining serviceable hearing following stereotactic radiosurgery utilizing modern dose planning, at 2, 5, and 10 yr following treatment? Recommendation Level 3 : Individuals who meet these criteria and are considering stereotactic radiosurgery should be counseled that there is moderately high probability (>50%-75%) of hearing preservation at 2 yr, moderately high probability (>50%-75%) of hearing preservation at 5 yr, and moderately low probability (>25%-50%) of hearing preservation at 10 yr. Question 2 Among patients with AAO-HNS (American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery hearing classification) class A or GR (Gardner-Robertson hearing classification) grade I hearing at baseline, what is the overall probability of maintaining serviceable hearing following stereotactic radiosurgery, utilizing modern dose planning, at 2, 5, and 10 yr following treatment? Recommendation Level 3 : Individuals who meet these criteria and are considering stereotactic radiosurgery should be counseled that there is a high probability (>75%-100%) of hearing preservation at 2 yr, moderately high probability (>50%-75%) of hearing preservation at 5 yr, and moderately low probability (>25%-50%) of hearing preservation at 10 yr. Question 3 What patient- and tumor-related factors influence progression to nonserviceable hearing following stereotactic radiosurgery using ≤13 Gy to the tumor margin? Recommendation Level 3: Individuals who meet these criteria and are considering stereotactic radiosurgery should be counseled regarding the probability of successful hearing preservation based on the following prognostic data: the most consistent prognostic features associated with maintenance of serviceable hearing are good preoperative word recognition and/or pure tone thresholds with variable cut-points reported, smaller tumor size, marginal tumor dose ≤12 Gy, and cochlear dose ≤4 Gy. Age and sex are not strong predictors of hearing preservation outcome. MICROSURGERY Question 4 What is the overall probability of maintaining serviceable hearing following microsurgical resection of small to medium-sized sporadic vestibular schwannomas early after surgery, at 2, 5, and 10 yr following treatment? Recommendation Level 3 : Individuals who meet these criteria and are considering microsurgical resection should be counseled that there is a moderately low probability (>25%-50%) of hearing preservation immediately following surgery, moderately low probability (>25%-50%) of hearing preservation at 2 yr, moderately low probability (>25%-50%) of hearing preservation at 5 yr, and moderately low probability (>25%-50%) of hearing preservation at 10 yr. Question 5 Among patients with AAO-HNS class A or GR grade I hearing at baseline, what is the overall probability of maintaining serviceable hearing following microsurgical resection of small to medium-sized sporadic vestibular schwannomas early after surgery, at 2, 5, and 10 yr following treatment? Recommendation Level 3: Individuals who meet these criteria and are considering microsurgical resection should be counseled that there is a moderately high probability (>50%-75%) of hearing preservation immediately following surgery, moderately high probability (>50%-75%) of hearing preservation at 2 yr, moderately high probability (>50%-75%) of hearing preservation at 5 yr, and moderately low probability (>25%-50%) of hearing preservation at 10 yr. Question 6 What patient- and tumor-related factors influence progression to nonserviceable hearing following microsurgical resection of small to medium-sized sporadic vestibular schwannomas? Recommendation Level 3: Individuals who meet these criteria and are considering microsurgical resection should be counseled regarding the probability of successful hearing preservation based on the following prognostic data: the most consistent prognostic features associated with maintenance of serviceable hearing are good preoperative word recognition and/or pure tone thresholds with variable cut-points reported, smaller tumor size commonly less than 1 cm, and presence of a distal internal auditory canal cerebrospinal fluid fundal cap. Age and sex are not strong predictors of hearing preservation outcome. CONSERVATIVE OBSERVATION Question 7 What is the overall probability of maintaining serviceable hearing with conservative observation of vestibular schwannomas at 2, 5, and 10 yr following diagnosis? Recommendation Level 3: Individuals who meet these criteria and are considering observation should be counseled that there is a high probability (>75%-100%) of hearing preservation at 2 yr, moderately high probability (>50%-75%) of hearing preservation at 5 yr, and moderately low probability (>25%-50%) of hearing preservation at 10 yr. Question 8 Among patients with AAO-HNS class A or GR grade I hearing at baseline, what is the overall probability of maintaining serviceable hearing with conservative observation at 2 and 5 yr following diagnosis? Recommendation Level 3: Individuals who meet these criteria and are considering stereotactic radiosurgery should be counseled that there is a high probability (>75%-100%) of hearing preservation at 2 yr, and moderately high probability (>50%-75%) of hearing preservation at 5 yr. Insufficient data were available to determine the probability of hearing preservation at 10 yr for this population subset. Question 9 What patient and tumor-related factors influence progression to nonserviceable hearing during conservative observation? Recommendation Level 3: Individuals who meet these criteria and are considering observation should be counseled regarding probability of successful hearing preservation based on the following prognostic data: the most consistent prognostic features associated with maintenance of serviceable hearing are good preoperative word recognition and/or pure tone thresholds with variable cut-points reported, as well as nongrowth of the tumor. Tumor size at the time of diagnosis, age, and sex do not predict future development of nonserviceable hearing during observation. The full guideline can be found at: https://www.cns.org/guidelines/guidelines-manage-ment-patients-vestibular-schwannoma/chapter_3.

Abstract QUESTION 1 What is the expected diagnostic yield for vestibular schwannomas when using a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to evaluate patients with previously published definitions of asymmetric sensorineural hearing loss? TARGET POPULATION These recommendations apply to adults with an asymmetric sensorineural hearing loss on audiometric testing. RECOMMENDATION Level 3: On the basis of an audiogram, it is recommended that MRI screening on patients with ≥10 decibels (dB) of interaural difference at 2 or more contiguous frequencies or ≥15 dB at 1 frequency be pursued to minimize the incidence of undiagnosed vestibular schwannomas. However, selectively screening patients with ≥15 dB of interaural difference at 3000 Hz alone may minimize the incidence of MRIs performed that do not diagnose a vestibular schwannoma. QUESTION 2 What is the expected diagnostic yield for vestibular schwannomas when using an MRI to evaluate patients with asymmetric tinnitus, as defined as either purely unilateral tinnitus or bilateral tinnitus with subjective asymmetry? TARGET POPULATION These recommendations apply to adults with subjective complaints of asymmetric tinnitus. RECOMMENDATION Level 3: It is recommended that MRI be used to evaluate patients with asymmetric tinnitus. However, this practice is low yielding in terms of vestibular schwannoma diagnosis (<1%). QUESTION 3 What is the expected diagnostic yield for vestibular schwannomas when using an MRI to evaluate patients with a sudden sensorineural hearing loss? TARGET POPULATION These recommendations apply to adults with a verified sudden sensorineural hearing loss on an audiogram. RECOMMENDATION Level 3: It is recommended that MRI be used to evaluate patients with a sudden sensorineural hearing loss. However, this practice is low yielding in terms of vestibular schwannoma diagnosis (<3%). The full guideline can be found at: https://www.cns.org/guidelines/guidelines-management-patients-vestibular-schwannoma/chapter_2.