Is the clinical head impulse test helpful in cochlear implantation candidacy evaluation?

Nicole T. Jiam,Yi Cai,Katherine C. Wai,Colleen Polite,Kurt Kramer,Jeffrey D. Sharon
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/wjo2.52
2022-09-30
Abstract:Assessment and work‐up of vestibular dysfunction during evaluation for cochlear implantation candidacy. A standardized algorithm may be used to determine whether or not to refer a patient for further vestibular work‐up. All patients should undergo evaluation and physical examination. If the patient's clinical head impulse test (cHIT) appears normal bilaterally, the audiometrically worse hearing ear should be selected for cochlear implantation. If the patient demonstrates bilateral, symmetric vestibulopathy during his or her cHIT, the audiometrically worse hearing ear should be selected for cochlear implantation. Physicians who encounter patients with unilateral or asymmetrical vestibulopathy may want to refer them for formal vestibular testing and work‐up to determine if there is a relative contraindication for cochlear implantation. Objective Vestibular dysfunction is a known risk of cochlear implantation (CI). However, the utility of the physical exam to screen CI candidates for vestibular dysfunction is not well‐studied. The objective of this study is to evaluate the preoperative role of the clinical head impulse test (cHIT) in subjects undergoing CI surgery evaluation. Study Design Setting, and Subjects We conducted a retrospective review of 64 adult CI candidacy cases between 2017 and 2020 at a tertiary health care center. Methods All patients underwent audiometric testing and evaluation by the senior author. Patients with an abnormal catch‐up saccade contralateral to their worse hearing ear during cHIT were referred for formal vestibular testing. Outcomes included clinical and formal vestibular results, operated ear with regard to audiometric and vestibular results, and postoperative vertigo. Results Among all CI candidates, 44% (n = 28) reported preoperative disequilibrium symptoms. Overall, 62% (n = 40) of the cHITs were normal, 33% (n = 21) were abnormal, and 5% (n = 3) were inconclusive. There was one patient who presented with a false positive cHIT. Among the patients who endorsed disequilibrium, 43% had a positive preoperative cHIT. Fourteen percent of the subjects (n = 9) without disequilibrium had an abnormal cHIT. In this cohort, bilateral vestibular impairment (71%) was more common than unilateral vestibular impairment (29%). In 3% of the cases (n = 2), surgical management was revisited or altered due to cHIT findings. Conclusion There is a high prevalence of vestibular hypofunction in the CI candidate population. Self‐reported assessments of vestibular function are often not congruent with cHIT results. Clinicians should consider incorporating cHITs as part of the preoperative physical exam to potentially avoid bilateral vestibular dysfunction in a minority of patients.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?