Pathophysiological dissociation of the interaction between time pressure and trait anxiety during spatial orientation judgments

What visuospatial perception has taught us about the pathophysiology of vestibular migraine

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

A decade has passed since vestibular migraine (VM) was formally established as a clinical entity. During this time, VM has emerged amongst the most common cause of episodic vertigo. Like all forms of migraine, VM symptoms are most prominent during individual attacks, however many patients may also develop persistent symptoms that are less prominent and can still interfere with daily activities.

RECENT FINDINGS

Vestibular inputs are strongly multimodal, and because of extensive convergence with other sensory information, they do not result in a distinct conscious sensation. Here we review experimental evidence that supports VM symptoms are linked to multisensory mechanisms that control body motion and position in space.

SUMMARY

Multisensory integration is a key concept for understanding migraine. In this context, VM pathophysiology may involve multisensory processes critical for motion perception, spatial orientation, visuospatial attention, and spatial awareness.

Visuospatial orientation: Differential effects of head and body positions

To orientate in space, the brain must integrate sensory information that encodes the position of the body with the visual cues from the surrounding environment. In this process, the extent of reliance on visual information is known as the visual dependence. Here, we asked whether the relative positions of the head and body can modulate such visual dependence (VD). We used the effect of optokinetic stimulation (30°/s) on subjective visual vertical (SVV) to quantify VD as the average optokinetic-induced SVV bias in clockwise and counter-clockwise directions. The VD bias was measured in eight subjects with a head-on-body tilt (HBT) where only the head was tilted on the body, and also with a whole-body tilt (WBT) where the head and body were tilted together. The VD bias with HBT of 20° was in the same direction of the head tilt position (left tilt VD -1.35 ± 0.1.2°; right VD 1.60 ± 0.9°), whereas the VD bias with WBT of 20° was in a direction away from the body tilt position (left tilt VD 2.5 ± 1.1°; right tilt VD -2.1 ± 0.9°). These findings show differential effects of relative head and body positions on visual cue integration, a process which could facilitate optimal interaction with the surrounding environment for spatial orientation.

Migraine phenotype differentially modulates the attentional network: A cross sectional observation study

Background:

Signs of distinct brain dysfunction in patients where migraine intersects with vertigo (i.e. vestibular migraine (VM)), remain elusive. As migraine and vertigo can both independently modulate attentional processes, here we seek the utility of the attentional network to functionally differentiate patients.

Methods:

We used the Attentional Network Task (ANT) to elucidate three separate functional networks: Alerting, orienting and resolving conflict. 120 participants had to attend to the direction of a target visual stimulus, while other parameters were simultaneously manipulated. Reaction times across the networks were assessed in, (i) 30 healthy controls, (ii) 30 VM patients, (iii) 30 patients with migraine without vertigo, and (iv) 30 patients with benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV) but no migraine.

Results:

Patients with VM (mean = 737.1 ms, SEM = 28), migraine (mean = 735.3 ms, SEM = 36.4), and BPPV (mean = 720.3 ms SEM = 24.3) all exhibited significantly delayed ANT reaction times compared to healthy controls (mean = 661.3 ms, SEM = 23.4). Specific attentional network deficits were observed for resolving conflict in VM, alerting in migraine and orienting in BPPV.

Conclusion:

VM patients displayed deficits in executive function characterized by an inability to focus attentional resources and suppress peripheral distractors, whereas migraineurs without vertigo exhibited changes in the alerting network that reflects hypervigilance.

Multisensory contribution in visuospatial orientation: an interaction between neck and trunk proprioception

A coherent perception of spatial orientation is key in maintaining postural control. To achieve this the brain must access sensory inputs encoding both the body and the head position and integrate them with incoming visual information. Here we isolated the contribution of proprioception to verticality perception and further investigated whether changing the body position without moving the head can modulate visual dependence-the extent to which an individual relies on visual cues for spatial orientation. Spatial orientation was measured in ten healthy individuals [6 female; 25-47 years (SD 7.8 years)] using a virtual reality based subjective visual vertical (SVV) task. Individuals aligned an arrow to their perceived gravitational vertical, initially against a static black background (10 trials), and then in other conditions with clockwise and counterclockwise background rotations (each 10 trials). In all conditions, subjects were seated first in the upright position, then with trunk tilted 20° to the right, followed by 20° to the left while the head was always aligned vertically. The SVV error was modulated by the trunk position, and it was greater when the trunk was tilted to the left compared to right or upright trunk positions (p < 0.001). Likewise, background rotation had an effect on SVV errors as these were greater with counterclockwise visual rotation compared to static background and clockwise roll motion (p < 0.001). Our results show that the interaction between neck and trunk proprioception can modulate how visual inputs affect spatial orientation.

Impaired Subjective Visual Vertical and Increased Visual Dependence in Older Adults With Falls

Aging affects the vestibular system and may disturb the perception of verticality and lead to increased visual dependence (VD). Studies have identified that abnormal upright perception influences the risk of falling. The aim of our study was to evaluate subjective visual vertical (SVV) and VD using a mobile virtual reality-based system for SVV assessment (VIRVEST) in older adults with falls and evaluate its relationship with clinical balance assessment tools, dizziness, mental state, and depression level. This study included 37 adults >65 years who experienced falls and 40 non-faller age-matched controls. Three tests were performed using the VIRVEST system: a static SVV, dynamic SVV with clockwise and counter-clockwise background stimulus motion. VD was calculated as the mean of absolute values of the rod tilt from each trial of dynamic SVV minus the mean static SVV rod tilt. Older adults who experienced falls manifested significantly larger biases in static SVV (p = 0.012), dynamic SVV (p < 0.001), and VD (p = 0.014) than controls. The increase in static SVV (odds ratio = 1.365, p = 0.023), dynamic SVV (odds ratio = 1.623, p < 0.001) and VD (odds ratio = 1.460, p = 0.010) tilt by one degree significantly related to falls risk in the faller group. Fallers who had a high risk of falling according to the Tinetti test exhibited significantly higher tilts of dynamic SVV than those who had a low or medium risk (p = 0.037). In the faller group, the increase of the dynamic SVV tilt by one degree was significantly related to falls risk according to the Tinetti test (odds ratio = 1.356, p = 0.049). SVV errors, particularly with the dynamic SVV test (i.e., greater VD) were associated with an increased risk of falling in the faller group. The VIRVEST system may be applicable in clinical settings for SVV testing and predicting falls in older adults.

Effects of galvanic vestibular stimulation on resting state brain activity in patients with bilateral vestibulopathy

We examined the effect of galvanic vestibular stimulation (GVS) on resting state brain activity using fMRI (rs‐fMRI) in patients with bilateral vestibulopathy. Based on our previous findings, we hypothesized that GVS, which excites the vestibular nerve fibers, (a) increases functional connectivity in temporoparietal regions processing vestibular signals, and (b) alleviates abnormal visual–vestibular interaction. Rs‐fMRI of 26 patients and 26 age‐matched healthy control subjects was compared before and after GVS. The stimulation elicited a motion percept in all participants. Using different analyses (degree centrality, DC; fractional amplitude of low frequency fluctuations [fALFF] and seed‐based functional connectivity, FC), group comparisons revealed smaller rs‐fMRI in the right Rolandic operculum of patients. After GVS, rs‐fMRI increased in the right Rolandic operculum in both groups and in the patients' cerebellar Crus 1 which was related to vestibular hypofunction. GVS elicited a fALFF increase in the visual cortex of patients that was inversely correlated with the patients' rating of perceived dizziness. After GVS, FC between parietoinsular cortex and higher visual areas increased in healthy controls but not in patients. In conclusion, short‐term GVS is able to modulate rs‐fMRI in healthy controls and BV patients. GVS elicits an increase of the reduced rs‐fMRI in the patients' right Rolandic operculum, which may be an important contribution to restore the disturbed visual–vestibular interaction. The GVS‐induced changes in the cerebellum and the visual cortex were associated with lower dizziness‐related handicaps in patients, possibly reflecting beneficial neural plasticity that might subserve visual–vestibular compensation of deficient self‐motion perception.