Halmagyi GM1, Chen L1, MacDougall HG2, Weber KP3,4, McGarvie LA1 and Curthoys IS2
1- Neurology Department, Institute of Clinical Neurosciences, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Camperdown, NSW, Australia
2-Vestibular Research Laboratory, School of Psychology, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
3- Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
4- Department of Neurology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
Abstract
In 1988, we introduced impulsive testing of semicircular canal (SCC) function measured with scleral search coils and showed that it could accurately and reliably detect impaired function even of a single lateral canal. Later we showed that it was also possible to test individual vertical canal function in peripheral and also in central vestibular disorders and proposed a physiological mechanism for why this might be so. For the next 20 years, between 1988 and 2008, impulsive testing of individual SCC function could only be accurately done by a few aficionados with the time and money to support scleral search-coil systems-an expensive, complicated and cumbersome, semi-invasive technique that never made the transition from the research lab to the dizzy clinic. Then, in 2009 and 2013, we introduced a video method of testing function of each of the six canals individually. Since 2009, the method has been taken up by most dizzy clinics around the world, with now close to 100 refereed articles in PubMed. In many dizzy clinics around the world, video Head Impulse Testing has supplanted caloric testing as the initial and in some cases the final test of choice in patients with suspected vestibular disorders. Here, we consider seven current, interesting, and controversial aspects of video Head Impulse Testing: (1) introduction to the test; (2) the progress from the headimpulse protocol (HIMPs) to the new variant-suppression head impulse protocol (SHIMPs); (3) the physiological basis for head impulsetesting; (4) practical aspects and potential pitfalls of video head impulse testing; (5) problems of vestibulo-ocular reflex gain calculations; (6) head impulse testing in central vestibular disorders; and (7) to stay right up-to-date-new clinical disease patterns emerging from video headimpulse testing. With thanks and appreciation we dedicate this article to our friend, colleague, and mentor, Dr Bernard Cohen of Mount Sinai Medical School, New York, who since his first article 55 years ago on compensatory eye movements induced by vertical SCC stimulation has become one of the giants of the vestibular world.
Link para o artigo: http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fneur.2017.00258/full
