Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35817001›Full record

ArticleAudiology & neuro-otology2022

Optimized Signal Analysis to Quantify the Non-Linear Behaviour of the Electrically Evoked Vestibulo-Ocular Reflex in Patients with a Vestibular Implant.

Dmitrii Starkov, Maksim Pleshkov, Nils Guinand, Angélica Pérez Fornos, Maurizio Ranieri, Samuel Cavuscens, Joost Johannes Antonius Stultiens, Elke Maria Johanna Devocht, Herman Kingma, Raymond van de Berg

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Audiology & neuro-otology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 34% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. [Recent progress in vestibular prosthesis].Lin chuang er bi yan hou tou jing wai ke za zhi = Journal of clinical otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery · 2023
    Review
  5. Vestibular prosthesis: from basic research to clinics.Frontiers in integrative neuroscience · 2023
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Dmitrii StarkovDivision of Balance Disorders, Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Maksim PleshkovDivision of Balance Disorders, Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Nils GuinandDepartment of Clinical Neurosciences, Service of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
Angélica Pérez FornosDepartment of Clinical Neurosciences, Service of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
Maurizio RanieriDepartment of Clinical Neurosciences, Service of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
Samuel CavuscensDepartment of Clinical Neurosciences, Service of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
Joost Johannes Antonius StultiensDivision of Balance Disorders, Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Elke Maria Johanna DevochtDivision of Balance Disorders, Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Herman KingmaDivision of Balance Disorders, Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Raymond van de BergDivision of Balance Disorders, Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
National Research Tomsk State University · RUUniversity Hospital of Geneva · CHMaastricht University Medical Centre · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDifferent eye movement analysis algorithms are used in vestibular implant research to quantify the electrically evoked vestibulo-ocular reflex (eVOR). Often, standard techniques are used as applied for quantification of the natural VOR in healthy subjects and patients with vestibular loss. However, in previous research, it was observed that the morphology of the VOR and eVOR may differ substantially. In this study, it was investigated if the analysis techniques for eVOR need to be adapted to optimize a truthful quantification of the eVOR (VOR gain, orientation of the VOR axis, asymmetry, and phase shift).

methods"Natural" VOR responses were obtained in six age-matched healthy subjects, and eVOR responses were obtained in eight bilateral-vestibulopathy patients fitted with a vestibular implant. Three conditions were tested: "nVOR" 1-Hz sinusoidal whole-body rotations of healthy subjects in a rotatory chair, "eVOR" 1-Hz sinusoidal electrical vestibular implant stimulation without whole-body rotations in bilateral-vestibulopathy patients, and "dVOR" 1-Hz sinusoidal whole-body rotations in bilateral-vestibulopathy patients using the chair-mounted gyroscope output to drive the electrical vestibular implant stimulation (therefore also in sync 1 Hz sinusoidal). VOR outcomes were determined from the obtained VOR responses, using three different eye movement analysis paradigms: (1) peak eye velocity detection using the raw eye traces; (2) peak eye velocity detection using full-cycle sine fitting of eye traces; (3) peak eye velocity detection using half-cycle sine fitting of eye traces.

resultsThe type of eye movement analysis algorithm significantly influenced VOR outcomes, especially regarding the VOR gain and asymmetry of the eVOR in bilateral-vestibulopathy patients fitted with a vestibular implant. Full-cycle fitting lowered VOR gain in the eVOR condition (mean difference: 0.14 ± 0.06 95% CI, p = 0.018). Half-cycle fitting lowered VOR gain in the dVOR condition (mean difference: 0.08 ± 0.04 95% CI, p = 0.009). In the eVOR condition, half-cycle fitting was able to demonstrate the asymmetry between the excitatory and inhibitory phases of stimulation in comparison with the full-cycle fitting (mean difference: 0.19 ± 0.12 95% CI, p = 0.024). The VOR axis and phase shift did not differ significantly between eye movement analysis algorithms. In healthy subjects, no clinically significant effect of eye movement analysis algorithms on VOR outcomes was observed.

conclusionFor the analysis of the eVOR, the excitatory and inhibitory phases of stimulation should be analysed separately due to the inherent asymmetry of the eVOR. A half-cycle fitting method can be used as a more accurate alternative for the analysis of the full-cycle traces.

Indexed as

Bilateral VestibulopathyVestibule, LabyrinthEye MovementsHumansProstheses and ImplantsReflex, Vestibulo-OcularBilateral vestibular areflexiaBilateral vestibulopathyEye movement analysis algorithmNeural prosthesisSignal fittingVestibular implantVestibular prosthesisVestibulo-ocular reflex

Identifiers

PMID35817001
PMCPMC9808707
OpenAlexW4285029392

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.