Automated Mechanical Repositioning Treatment for Posterior Canal Benign Paroxysmal Positional Vertigo: A Single-Center Experience and Literature Review

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of automated mechanical repositioning treatment (AMRT) for posterior canal benign paroxysmal positional vertigo -(PC-BPPV).

Patients and methods: We reviewed all PC-BPPV patients admitted to our department between January and -December 2016. The inclusion criteria mainly required conducting a diagnosis for PC-BPPV by using the Dix-Hallpike test, a PC-BPPV history within 1 month, no intake of medications for the last 48 h. Compared with the cases who received classical manual repositioning treatment (CMRT), the proportion of patients who underwent AMRT with a resolution within the 1-week follow-up session after initial treatment and a recurrence during the 6-month follow-up were evaluated.

Results: A total of182 patients who underwent AMRT and 152 patients who underwent CMRT were included. Compared with the CMRT group, the AMRT group had a higher rate of complete or partial resolution and positional nystagmus at the 1 week follow-up (92.6 vs. 86.2%; p = 0.004). AMRT with less treatment cycles was more effective than CMRT (1.5 vs. 1.9; p < 0.001). After 6 months of follow-up, the cumulative recurrence rate of the AMRT group was significantly lower than that of the CMRT group (3.0 vs. 8.9%; p = 0.037).

Conclusion: AMRT is a feasible and effective procedure for the resolution of PC-BPPV.

Keywords: Automated mechanical repositioning; Dix-Hallpike test; Epley maneuver; Posterior canal; Treatment; Vertigo.