Case Control Study
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2022.
World J Clin Pediatr. Jan 9, 2022; 11(1): 61-70
Published online Jan 9, 2022. doi: 10.5409/wjcp.v11.i1.61
Table 2 Cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potential results of the studied groups (mean ± SD)
Variables
Children with T1D (n = 40)
Controls (n = 25)
P value (P1)
P value (P2)
P1 latency, n1 (%)
Unilateral6 (15)---
Bilateral10 (25)---
Range, ms
Right ear18.00–22.00 (20.16 ± 1.34)10.40–16.40 (12.03 ± 1.01)0.030.542
Left ear13.00–29.00 (20.40 ± 1.10)10.40–17.60 (14.25 ± 1.68)0.02
N1 latency, n1 (%)
Unilateral6 (15)---
Bilateral10 (25)---
Range, ms
Right ear22.00–33.00 (28.30 ± 2.66)18.65–26.70 (22.43 ± 1.82)0.040.364
Left ear24.00–36.80 (32.35 ± 2.84)16.82–30.82 (26.45 ± 1.02)0.03
P1-N1 amplitude, n1 (%)
Unilateral10 (25)---
Bilateral24 (60)---
Range, μV
Right ear
Range20.00–90.0048.60–92.800.0010.458
Median44.2072.43
25th36.0060.35
50th40.4576.44
75th48.5586.62
Left ear
Range26.68–86.0046.03–98.000.001
Median46.2074.68
25th33.2554.36
50th45.0080.00
75th56.2588.56
AR
Range1.12–66.200.0-15.80.001
Median18.304.88
25th6.581.88
50th13.362.90
75th32.446.30
n1 (%)10 (25)0