Spatial navigation is distinctively impaired in persistent postural perceptual dizziness
Author
dc.contributor.author
Breinbauer Krebs, Hayo
Author
dc.contributor.author
Contreras, María Daniela
Author
dc.contributor.author
Lira, Juan P.
Author
dc.contributor.author
Guevara, Claudia
Author
dc.contributor.author
Castillo, Leslie
Author
dc.contributor.author
Ruedlinger, Katherine
Author
dc.contributor.author
Muñoz Candia, Daniel
Author
dc.contributor.author
Délano Reyes, Paul
Admission date
dc.date.accessioned
2020-04-22T16:03:12Z
Available date
dc.date.available
2020-04-22T16:03:12Z
Publication date
dc.date.issued
2020
Cita de ítem
dc.identifier.citation
Frontiers in Immunology January 2020 | Volume 10 | Article 1361
es_ES
Identifier
dc.identifier.issn
1664-2295
Identifier
dc.identifier.other
10.3389/fneur.2019.01361
Identifier
dc.identifier.uri
https://repositorio.uchile.cl/handle/2250/174014
Abstract
dc.description.abstract
Objective: To determine whether performance in a virtual spatial navigational task is poorer in persistent postural perceptual dizziness (PPPD) patients than in healthy volunteers and patients suffering other vestibular disorders. Methods: Subjects were asked to perform three virtual Morris water maze spatial navigational tasks: (i) with a visible target, (ii) then with an invisible target and a fixed starting position, and finally (iii) with an invisible target and random initial position. Data were analyzed using the cumulative search error (CSE) index. Results: While all subjects performed equally well with a visible target, the patients with PPPD (n = 19) performed poorer (p < 0.004) in the invisible target/navigationally demanding tasks (CSE median of 8) than did the healthy controls (n = 18; CSE: 3) and vestibular controls (n = 19; CSE: 4). Navigational performance in the most challenging setting allowed us to discriminate PPPD patients from controls with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.83 (sensitivity 78.1%; specificity 83.3%). PPPD patients manifested more chaotic and disorganized search strategies, with more dispersion in the navigational pool than those of the non-PPPD groups (standard distance deviation of 0.97 vs. 0.46 in vestibular controls and 0.20 in healthy controls; p < 0.001). Conclusions: While all patients suffering a vestibular disorder had poorer navigational abilities than healthy controls did, patients with PPPD showed the worst performance, to the point that this variable allowed the discrimination of PPPD from non-PPPD patients. This distinct impairment in spatial navigation abilities offers new insights into PPPD pathophysiology and may also represent a new biomarker for diagnosing this entity