Objective: To compare the clinical efficacy between 360-degree maneuver and Epley maneuver repositioning treatment in patients with posterior semicircular canal benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV).
Methods: There were 69 patients with posterior semicircular canal BPPV were randomly divided into study group (n = 35, treated with 360-degree maneuver) and the control group (n = 34, treated with Epley maneuver). The efficacy and the residual symptoms after recovery between the two groups were compared.
Results: There were 91.4% (32/35) of the patients in the study group and 88.2% (30/34) of the patients in the control group achieved recovery after single treatment, and the difference was not significant (P ＞ 0.05). The proportions of patients who achieved recovery after two treatments were 8.6% (3/35) in the study group and 11.8% (4/34) in the control group, and the difference was also not significant (P ＞ 0.05). The proportion of patients who had been cured but still had residual symptoms (including dizziness, walking instability and neck discomfort) in the study group was 17.1% (6/34), which was significantly lower than that of the control group [29.4% (10/35)] (P < 0.05).
Conclusion: 360-Degree maneuver and Epley maneuver in the treatment of posterior semicircular canal BPPV can achieve similar effectiveness, but less residual symptoms are observed in patients treated with 360-Degree maneuver, which can improve the quality of life of the patients, and has the advantages of simpler operation, better comfort, and higher clinical application value.
Key words
Benign paroxysmal positional vertigo /
Posterior semicircular canal /
360-Degree maneuver /
Epley maneuver /
Residual symptoms
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
References
[1] Lee NH, Ban JH, Lee KC, et al. Benign paroxysmal positional vertigo secondary to inner ear disease[J]. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 2010, 143(3):413-417.
[2] Dispenza F, Kulamarva G, de Stefano A. Comparison of repositioning maneuvers for benign paroxysmal positional vertigo of posterior semicircular canal: advantages of hybrid maneuver[J]. Am J Otolaryngol, 2012, 33(5):528-532.
[3] 谭 俊, 于栋祯, 冯艳梅, 等. 复位治疗椅辅助治疗后半规管良性阵发性位置性眩晕的疗效观察[J]. 听力学及言语疾病杂志, 2013, 21(2):109-111.
[4] 张 颖, 张京秋, 赵锦成, 等. SRM-Ⅳ眩晕诊疗系统在良性阵发性位置性眩晕中的临床应用[J]. 临床耳鼻咽喉头颈外科杂志, 2015, 29(14):1248-1252.
[5] Seok JI, Lee HM, Yoo JH, et al. Residual dizziness after successful repositioning treatment in patients with benign paroxysmal positional vertigo[J]. J Clin Neurol, 2008, 4(3):107-110.
[6] 中华耳鼻咽喉头颈外科杂志编辑委员会. 良性阵发性位置性眩晕的诊断依据和疗效评估（2006，贵阳）[J]. 中华耳鼻咽喉头颈外科杂志, 2007, 42(3):163-164.
[7] 黄选兆, 汪吉宝, 孔维佳. 实用耳鼻咽喉头颈外科学[M]. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2008: 1046-1047.
[8] 章燕幸, 吴承龙, 肖桂荣, 等. 后半规管良性阵发性位置性眩晕三种自我治疗手法的疗效比较[J]. 中华耳鼻咽喉头颈外科杂志, 2012, 47(10):799-803.
[9] Horak FB. Postural compensation for vestibular loss and implications for rehabilitation[J]. Restor Neurol Neurosci, 2010, 28(1):57-68.
[10] 李亚楠. 良性阵发性位置性眩晕患者临床特点及手法复位疗效分析[J]. 中外医学研究, 2015, 13(10):47-49.
[11] Lee HK, Ahn SK, Jeon SY, et al. Clinical characteristics and natural course of recurrent vestibulopathy: a long-term follow-up study[J]. Larnygoscope, 2012, 122(4):883-886.
[12] Li JC, Epley J. The 360-degree maneuver for treatment of benign positional vertigo[J]. Otol Neurotol, 2006, 27(1):71-77.
[13] 孙 勍, 马丽涛, 李 娜, 等. 前庭功能诊治系统SRM-Ⅳ在良性阵发性位置性眩晕中的应用[J]. 中华耳科学杂志, 2010, 8(1):83-85.
Funding
Xuzhou Science and Technology Planning Project (No. KC16SL143)
PDF(1658 KB)
