单侧及双侧短纯音刺激前庭诱发肌源性电位观察  

Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potentials Due to Biaural and Monaural Tone Burst Stimulation

作　　者：孙伟[1] 王锦玲[1] 邱建华[1] 毛蔚英[1] 韩丽萍[1] 

机构地区：[1]第四军医大学西京医院全军耳鼻咽喉专科中心,西安710032

出　　处：《听力学及言语疾病杂志》2005年第3期149-151,共3页Journal of Audiology and Speech Pathology

摘　　要：目的　比较正常人单、双侧短纯音刺激的前庭诱发肌源性电位(vestibularevokedmyogenicpotential,VEMP)的反应特性,以用于临床球囊功能及其对称性的检测。方法　对86名年龄18～5 0岁的正常人分别在单、双侧短纯音( 5 0 0Hz)刺激下测定VEMP的引出率、潜伏期、振幅、耳间潜伏期差、耳间振幅比和耳间不对称率。结果　双侧及单侧给声侧VEMP引出率为10 0 % ,对侧未给声侧为4 5 .9%。双侧与单侧给声侧p13及n2 3的潜伏期均值分别为17.2 9±2 .17、2 4 .98±2 .6 7、17.39±1.94和2 5 .6 5±3.2 8ms,两种刺激方式下无明显差异,但均与对侧未给声侧差异显著(P <0 .0 5 )。双侧短纯音刺激振幅均值与单侧给声侧有显著性差异(P <0 .0 5 ) ,与对侧未给声侧有高度显著性差异(P <0 .0 1) ,分别为12 3.35±73.0 6、15 0 .0 5±76 .5 8、84 .0 2±5 5 .80 μV。单、双侧短纯音刺激耳间振幅比,耳间潜伏期差以及耳间不对称率均有显著性差异(P <0 .0 5 ,P <0 .0 1,P <0 .0 1) ,单侧声刺激时对侧未给声侧潜伏期较给声侧延长。结论　单侧给声侧、双侧短纯音刺激VEMP的引出率、潜伏期无明显差异,但振幅、耳间潜伏期差、耳间振幅比和耳间不对称率均有显著性差异。双侧短纯音刺激VEMP是一稳定、适宜和简便的检测方式。Objective To investigate the characteristics of vestibular evoked myogenic potential (VEMP) using simultaneous biaural tone burst stimulation and compare with that using monaural tone burst stimulation, so as to establish a method to test saccular function and their asymmetry.Methods In eighty-six normal subjects aged from 18 to 50 years old,VEMP, elicited biaurally and monaurally by 95 dB nHL tone burst stimulus, were recorded from surface electrodes over the sternomastoid muscles. The provocation rate,latency, amplitude, interaural latency difference, interaural amplitude ratio, interaural asymmetric ratio were calculated.Results VEMP provocation rates for both simultaneous biaural acoustic stimulation and monaural ipsilateral acoustic stimulation were 100%, and the provocation rate for the contralateral acoustic stimulation free ear was only 45.9 %. VEMP latencies of p13 and n23 for the biaural and monaural ipsilateral acoustic stimulations were 17.29±2.17,24.98±2.67,17.39±1.94 and 25.65±3.28 ms respectively. There was no significant difference between the VEMP latencies for the biaural and monaural ipsilateral acoustic stimulations, but there was notable difference between the above latencies and those for the contralateral acoustic stimulation free ear( P <0.05). Amplitude for biaural acoustic stimulation differed significantly from that for monaural ipsilateral acoustic stimulation( P <0.05), and from that for monaural contralateral acoustic stimulation( P <0.01)(123.35±73.06,150.05±76.58,84.02±55.80 μV respectively).There were significant differences in interaural amplitnde ratio,interaural latency difference and interaural asymmetric ratio between biaural and monaural acoustic stimulation( P <0.05, P <0.01, P <0.01).The contralateral latencies delayed, comparing with ipsilateral ones in response to monaural acoustic stimulation.Conclusion Between biaural and monaural acoustic stimulation VEMP, there are no significant differences in provocation rate, latency, but there are marked d

关 键 词：前庭诱发肌源性电位 短纯音刺激 球囊 

分 类 号：R764.04[医药卫生—耳鼻咽喉科]