The Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potential (VEMP): Air- Versus Bone-Conducted Stimuli

Abstract

Several studies have evaluated the effects of different stimulus and recording parameters on the cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potential (cVEMP); however, it is difficult to directly compare these studies as they have all used different recording methods, different sternocleidomastoid (SCM) muscle contraction/electromyography monitoring methods, and different stimulus parameters. : This study made a direct comparison of the cVEMP in response to air-conducted (AC) and bone-conducted (BC) stimuli in the same subjects, using the same stimulus/recording/electromyography monitoring methods. We found that the input/output (I/O) functions were more linear in response to AC stimuli, whereas cVEMPs in response to BC stimuli began to saturate at the highest level. In addition, cVEMP threshold was obtained at a lower stimulus level (i.e., at a lower sensation level) in response to BC stimuli as compared with AC stimuli, and cVEMPs in response to BC stimuli were larger than cVEMPs in response to AC stimuli, which is in agreement with what has been found in previous studies. In addition, this was one of the few studies to evaluate the repeatability of the cVEMP in response to BC stimuli. Interestingly, we found that cVEMP latency in response to BC stimuli was, in most cases, less variable than cVEMP latency obtained in response to AC stimuli, whereas the reverse was true for cVEMP amplitude. We also found that BC masking presented to the forehead affected response amplitude of the AC cVEMP regardless of the specific SCM muscle contraction/toneburst presentation condition. In addition, we found that the ratio of amplitude reduction was greater in the binaural stimulation/bilateral SCM muscle contraction condition as compared with the monaural stimulation/bilateral SCM muscle contraction condition. The present experiment provided a direct comparison of the cVEMP in response to AC versus BC 500 Hz short-duration toneburst stimuli in the same subjects. The results of the present experiment also provide insight into the laterality of the cVEMP response and reveal that the cVEMP may not be completely ipsilateral (i.e., there may be a form of bilateral interaction that occurs when both sides are stimulated simultaneously). Last, the results indicate that BC stimuli likely activates the saccule as well as the utricle, given that AC VEMPs can be masked by the administration of BC masking noise presented to the midline.