Objective:Comparative analysis of the reduction effect of the evoked nystagmus in the non-affect side during Dix-Hallpike（D-H） or Roll-test in unilateral posterior semicircular canal benign paroxysmal positional vertigo（PC-BPPV） and PC-BPPV without above evoked nystagmus. Method:Retrospective analysis of 210 patients diagnosed with unilateral PC-BPPV by G-Force BPPV CRP system was made. Among them, 18 patients exhibited positive nystagmus only when the non-affected side was stimulated by D-H test（Group A）, 30 was evoked only when stimulated by Roll-test（Group B）, 26 was evoked when stimulated by both Roll-test and the non-affected side D-H test（Group C）, 136 without nystagmus in the above positions（Group D）. All the patients were diagnosed by G-Force BPPV and were treated through simulative Epley or Semont CRP. Compare the reduction effect among the groups. Result:At the first time ,the reduction effect of nystagmus in Group D was superior to those in Group A and Group C（P<0.05）. There was no difference between Group D and Group B（P>0.05）. The difference between Group A and Group C was also non-significant（P>0.05）. The average CRP times of the four groups（CRP until nystagmus disappeared or no longer alleviated） were 1.44±0.63（Group A）, 1.46±0.65（Group B）, 1.52±0.87（Group C） and 1.48±0.73（Group D）respectively. There were no statistic difference between four groups（P>0.05）. The differences of final reduction effect between groups were the same as those at the first time. Conclusion:The first time reduction effect was less effective when nystagmus evoked the non-affect side during D-H test in unilateral PC-BPPV, while it might be irrelevant to the nystagmus evoked only in Roll-test. Although the times of CRP were similar among the groups, the final reduction effect of groups with nystagmus evoked the non-affect side during D-H was poorer.
目的：比较健侧Dix-Hallpike（D-H）及Roll-test诱发眼震的单侧后半规管良性阵发性位置性眩晕（PC-BPPV）与未出现上述眼震的单侧PC-BPPV的复位疗效并分析其原因。 方法：回顾性分析诊断为单侧PC-BPPV患者210例，其中18例仅于健侧D-H诱发眼震（A组），30例仅于Roll-test诱发眼震（B组），26例于健侧D-H及Roll-test均诱发眼震（C组），136例无出现上述眼震（D组）。以上患者均通过G-Force BPPV诊疗仪确诊并模拟Epley或者Semont方法复位，比较其复位效果。 结果：首次复位，D组复位效果优于A组和C组（P<0.05）；D组与B组比较，复位效果差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）；A组与C组复位效果差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。A、B、C、D组患者予以复位治疗达到眼震消失或最终眼震减轻（再次复位眼震无改善）所需要的平均复位次数分别为（1.44±0.63）次、（1.46±0.65）次、（1.52±0.87）次、（1.48±0.73）次，4组间两两比较差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）。而对于多次复位的效果，组间的差异与首次复位结果相同。 结论：单侧PC-BPPV行位置试验时，若健侧D-H诱发眼震，首次复位效果欠佳。若仅Roll-test诱发眼震，并不影响其首次复位效果。4种情况的PC-BPPV复位次数无明显差异，但健侧D-H诱发眼震的单侧PC-BPPV患者多次复位后效果仍欠佳。.
Keywords: canalith repositioning; nystagmus; posterior semicircular canal; vertigo.
Copyright© by the Editorial Department of Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery.