ClinicalTrials.gg
Not yet recruitingNCT06370897Updated May 13, 2024

Prediction & Mechanisms of Recovery Following IEDS

An observational study in Decompression Sickness, sponsored by University of Plymouth. Not yet recruiting. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 85 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-05-13.

Sponsored by University of Plymouth · Observational

Study type
Observational
Model
Cohort
Time perspective
Other
Enrollment
41
Ages
18 Years to 85 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Inner Ear Decompression sickness (IEDS) accounts for 20% of all types of decompression sickness (the bends) in divers. The condition commonly affects the peripheral vestibular system (inner ear). IEDS results in acute symptoms of dizzyness (vertigo) and imbalance. Even with the recommended treatment of hyperbaric oxygen therapy some people do not recovery fully. However, even in the presence of a permanent vestibular deficit many people can show a behavioural recovery where symptoms improve over time. Recovery can be aided by vestibular rehabilitation (VR) which is now routine for acute IEDS but was not provided before 2021, and is not widespread across the UK (United Kingdom) or world, meaning people may have a suboptimal recovery.

This project will investigate if and how people recover after an acute episode of IEDS and whether people who had IEDS in the past show changes in the central (brain) processing of vestibular function and in symptoms of dizziness, balance and posture.

This project has two main parts. Part one is a prospective observational study where people with an acute onset of IEDS are serially monitored while they are receiving hyperbaric treatment and VR over 10-14 days. Part two is a retrospective observational study where who have had IEDS in the past 15 years are re-assessed in a one-off session. The tests in both parts involve clinical tests and specialist eye movement recordings that assess vestibular function. We will also determine the site of any vestibular pathology by using selective stimulation of the vestibular end organ or nerve and assess whether there are any changes in how the structure and function of central vestibular pathways in the brain. In people with chronic IEDS with vestibular symptoms we will offer participants a course of VR over 12 weeks and assess whether this is associated with any improvement in symptoms.

Read the detailed description

Decompression sickness after diving can occur following a rapid ascent. Here, nitrogen, absorbed by the body when breathing compressed air at depth, comes out of solution and forms microbubbles in the blood. Inner ear decompression sickness (IEDS) accounts for approximately 20% of all cases of decompression sickness. The vestibular system is involved in \~85% cases of IEDS resulting in symptoms of vertigo, nausea, vomiting and unsteadiness with hearing loss and tinnitus.

The strong association of IEDS with a patent foramen ovale (50-73% of cases) suggests that a shunted venous gas embolism causes damage to the vestibular apparatus, which is particularly vulnerable due to its low perfusion and thus slow inert gas washout, compared to the cochlea and other brain structures. It is hypothesised that the nitrogen bubbles within the blood vessels trigger an inflammatory reaction in the endothelium with a coagulation cascade that leads to hypoxic injury and/or that there is direct damage to the membranous labyrinth. Animal models of rapid decompression suggest that it can cause a haemorrhage within the labyrinth with ectopic bone growth and fibrosis occurring over the next month. Advances in the imaging of the inner ear using a gadolinium-based contrast agent (GBCA) allow us to explore structural changes in human divers. Imaging can also help to differentially diagnose another potential cause of diving induced dizziness, superior structural dehiscence syndrome

Decompression sickness and the subsequent inflammatory response requires emergency treatment using with hyperbaric oxygen. The effects of hyperbaric therapy and rehabilitation are not uniform across participants, factors affecting recovery include a high clinical score on admission and a delay in hyperbaric recompression of over 6 hours. Complete recovery is seen in only about 30% of cases. Previous studies have highlighted that people who do not fully recover can have a variety of symptoms that can affect work, hobbies and well-being. These include feelings of instability in some situations (working at a height and with movement) and imbalance in the dark or when changing position.

In people with permanent vestibular pathology, symptoms can still improve due to central adaptive processes within the brain termed vestibular compensation. Clinical studies in other types of peripheral vestibular dysfunction show that it is possible to facilitate the compensation process and symptom recovery through vestibular rehabilitation. Early access to vestibular rehabilitation is now routine practice at the Diving Diseases Research Centre (DDRC) where patients are treated in the South-West UK. This is coupled to diagnosis and monitoring of vestibular function using objective laboratory tests (rotary testing) and clinical tests.

Animal studies highlight the mechanisms underlying vestibular compensation following a peripheral nerve lesion. These focus on changes in the interconnections between brainstem nuclei (e.g. vestibular nuclei) and the cerebellum and re-weighting of the relative importance of multi-sensory sensory inputs. Human studies in chronic peripheral dysfunction also suggest there are recovery-related changes in cortical areas that normally process vestibular information over time. Functional changes in the acute stages include an increase in contralesional activity in the parietoinsular vestibular cortex as well as interlinked subcortical areas (posterolateral thalamus, anterior cingulate gyrus, pontomesencephalic brainstem, hippocampus) with a decrease in activity was seen in the visual, somatosensory and auditory cortices. Structural changes over the first 3 months post lesion include increases in grey matter volume in the vestibular cortex, bilateral hippocampus, visual cortices and the cerebellum.

Within the DDRC vestibular rehabilitation has only been routinely undertaken for people diagnosed with IEDS since 2021. As complete recovery is seen in only about 30% of cases [9]; this suggests that there may be a cohort of patients with residual vestibular symptoms. In surveys of the aural and vestibular effects of diving, including those conducted by the DDRC, 79% (of 790 respondents) have reported aural related problems after learning to dive. Of those with reported problems 46% did not seek any medical advice and 39% specifically reported dizziness / vertigo. In total this suggests that at least 14% of all divers may have undiagnosed vestibular problems that could benefit from vestibular rehabilitation. A case review highlights that since 1999 there have been 79 cases of clinically diagnosed IEDS at the DDRC. Therefore, there is a need to assess and provide rehabilitation support to people with past IEDS and potentially in the future a larger cohort of divers with previously undiagnosed symptoms.

This study plans to:

undertake a prospective observational study where people with acute onset IEDS are followed up. This will include the current battery of clinical and laboratory (rotary) tests but also additional optional clinical and physiological testing (Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potentials VEMPs), imaging (Diffusor Tensor Imaging DTI and functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging f MRI) and semis-structured interviews in the acute (1-14 days) and chronic (3 months and 12 months) stage.

We will also:

undertake a retrospective cross-sectional study of people who have previously been managed for IEDS by the DDRC. Here we will undertake the same battery of tests as for the prospective study which includes measures of potential risk factors and patient reported outcome measures. We will also take this opportunity to explore people's symptoms post IEDS and their views on future rehabilitation trials. In those with remaining vestibular symptoms and signs we will provide advice on vestibular rehabilitation by qualified personnel with follow up as required. We will compare our data to a cohort of healthy controls of a similar age and gender distribution.

02

Conditions studied

  • Decompression Sickness

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • vestibular, inner ear
03

In context

Decompression Sickness

21 studies on the registry are indexed under Decompression Sickness; 6 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 41 is below the median of 74 across 12 observational studies indexed under Decompression Sickness.

Browse Decompression Sickness studies →

Lead sponsor

University of Plymouth is the lead sponsor of 49 studies on the registry; 16 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 85 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

Population: Divers

Exposure: Dive resulting in IEDS symptoms

Eligibility criteria

Prospective Study :

Inclusion

  • Divers admitted with suspected IEDS

Exclusion

  • Medically unstable
  • Unstable orthopaedic deficits

Retrospective study :

Inclusion

  • Divers diagnosed with IEDS at DDRC within past 10 years

Exclusion

  • We will include all co-morbidities as these could affect prognosis and recovery following IEDS.

Healthy control comparator group :

Normative data will be gathered on an age matched group. There will be at least 10 participants for each decade (\<30yrs ,30-40yrs, 40-50 yrs,50-60yrs,60-70 yr.)

Inclusion criteria:

  • Adults over 18 years

Exclusion criteria:

  • Neurological, sensory or orthopaedic conditions that could affect balance.
05

Study design

Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Other
Enrollment
41 participants (estimated)
Patient registry
No

Groups and cohorts

  • Prospective Cohort

    Divers admitted with suspected IEDS

  • Retrospective Cohort

    Divers diagnosed with Inner ear decompression sickness (IEDS) at Deep Diving Research Centre within past 10 years

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Side of peripheral vestibular damage: Prospective cohort

    Side (left or right) of vestibular dysfunction as determine by video head impulse test (v HIT) testing

    Time frame: T0=baseline within 24 hours of IEDS in the prospective cohort

  2. Site of peripheral vestibular damage: Prospective cohort

    Site of dysfunction: semi-circular canals affected as determine by v HIT testing. One or a combination of Horizontal, anterior or posterior canals.

    Time frame: T0=baseline within 24 hours of IEDS in the prospective cohort

  3. Extent of peripheral vestibular damage: Prospective cohort

    VOR gain (unit less) as measured by v HIT at T0 (Range 0-1 higher values are better outcome)

    Time frame: T0=baseline within 24 hours of IEDS in the prospective cohort

  4. Side of peripheral vestibular damage: Retrospective cohort

    Side (left or right) of vestibular dysfunction as determine by video head impulse test (v HIT) testing

    Time frame: 1 time point: 0-10 years post injury

  5. Site of peripheral vestibular damage:Retrospective cohort

    Site of dysfunction: semi-circular canals affected as determine by v HIT testing.One or a combination of Horizontal, anterior or posterior canals.

    Time frame: 1 time point: 0-10 years post injury

  6. Extent of peripheral vestibular damage:Retrospective cohort

    VOR gain (unit less) at T0 (Range 0-1 higher values are better outcome)

    Time frame: 1 time point: 0-10 years post injury

Secondary outcomes

  1. VOR gain v HIT: Prospective Study

    Change from baseline (T0) in VOR gain assessed through V HIT test . Gain is unit less and range from 0-1 where higher values indicate a better clinical outcome.

    Time frame: 7-10 days , 3 months and 12 months post injury

  2. VOR gain: Prospective Study

    Change from baseline (T0) in VOR gain assessed through sinusoidal rotation in the dark . Gain is unit less and range from 0-1 where higher values indicate a better clinical outcome.

    Time frame: 7-10 days , 3 months and 12 months post injury

  3. VOR Time constant:Prospective Study

    Change from baseline (T0)in VOR time constant in response to a step rotation (initial 140°/s acceleration/deceleration and a 60°/s fixed-chair velocity) stimulus . Time constant (seconds) where a higher time constant is clinically better. Range 0-40s.

    Time frame: 7-10 days , 3 months and 12 months post injury

  4. Patient reported outcome measure: Prospective Study

    Change from baseline (T0) in PROM (patient reported outcome measure) vertigo severity scale.15 questions rated 0-4. Score range =0-60 where lower scores indicate a better clinical outcome

    Time frame: 7-10 days , 3 months and 12 months post injury

  5. Clinical measure of walking: Prospective Study

    Change from baseline (T0) in Dynamic Gait Assessment (DGA). Eight tasks scored 0-3. Total range = 0-24 with a higher score indicating better walking ability.

    Time frame: 7-10 days , 3 months and 12 months post injury

  6. Clinical measure of balance: Prospective Study

    Change from baseline (T0) in Clinical measures of balance sharpened Romberg (tandem stance). The length of time a person is able to stand in the eyes open, tandem stance position is recorded up to a maximum of 30 seconds.

    Time frame: 7-10 days , 3 months and 12 months post injury

  7. Posturography: Prospective Study

    Change from baseline (T0) in Postural sway quotient. Postural sway (mm/s) is measured via force plates. The ratio of the sway with eyes open and eyes closed is calculated (unitless ratio).

    Time frame: 7-10 days , 3 months and 12 months post injury

  8. Perception of verticality: Prospective Study

    Change from baseline (T0) in Rod and Disk test: The ability to orientate a line to vertical is assessed with / without visual distractors. The error from vertical is recorded in degrees. Outcomes range from 0-180 degrees where lower numbers indicate better verical perception.

    Time frame: 7-10 days , 3 months and 12 months post injury

  9. Functional MRI response to an optokinetic stimulus: Prospective Study

    Change from baseline (T0) in Regions of interest will also assess changes in activation with an optokinetic stimulus compared to rest in cortical and subcortical sites that process vestibular information namely the insulo-parietal cortex and hippocampus and sites that process other sensory information namely the visual cortex and somatosensory cortex

    Time frame: 7-10 days , 3 months and 12 months post injury

  10. Vestibular Evoked myogenic Potentials latency: Prospective Study

    Change from baseline (T0) in Galvanic and Auditory Vestibular Evoked myogenic Potentials (VEMPs) will be assessed and the latency of evoked responses measured in milliseconds.

    Time frame: 7-10 days , 3 months and 12 months post injury

  11. Vestibular Evoked myogenic Potentials amplitude: Prospective Study

    Change from baseline (T0) in Galvanic and Auditory Vestibular Evoked myogenic Potentials (VEMPs) will be assessed and the amplitude of evoked responses measured in millivolts.

    Time frame: 7-10 days , 3 months and 12 months post injury

  12. VOR gain: Retrospective Study

    VOR gain assessed through sinusoidal rotation in the dark . Gain is unit less and range from 0-1 where higher values indicate a better clinical outcome.

    Time frame: 7-10 days , 3 months and 12 months post injury

  13. VOR Time constant: Retrospective Study

    VOR time constant in response to a step rotation (initial 140°/s acceleration/deceleration and a 60°/s fixed-chair velocity) stimulus . Time constant (seconds) where a higher time constant is clinically better. Range 0-40s.

    Time frame: 1 time point: 0-10 years post injury

  14. Patient reported outcome measure: Retrospective Study

    PROM (patient reported outcome measure) vertigo severity scale.15 questions rated 0-4. Score range =0-60 where lower scores indicate a better clinical outcome

    Time frame: 1 time point: 0-10 years post injury

  15. Clinical measure of walking: Retrospective Study

    Dynamic Gait Assessment (DGA). Eight tasks scored 0-3. Total range = 0-24 with a higher score indicating better walking ability.

    Time frame: 1 time point: 0-10 years post injury

  16. Clinical measure of balance: Retrospective Study

    Clinical measures of balance sharpened Romberg (tandem stance). The length of time a person is able to stand in the eyes open, tandem stance position is recorded up to a maximum of 30 seconds.

    Time frame: 1 time point: 0-10 years post injury

  17. Posturography: Retrospective Study

    Postural sway quotient. Postural sway (mm/s) is measured via force plates. The ratio of the sway with eyes open and eyes closed is calculated (unitless ratio).

    Time frame: 1 time point: 0-10 years post injury

  18. Perception of verticality: Retrospective Study

    Rod and Disk test: The ability to orientate a line to vertical is assessed with / without visual distractors. The error from vertical is recorded in degrees. Outcomes range from 0-180 degrees where lower numbers indicate better verical perception.

    Time frame: 1 time point: 0-10 years post injury

  19. Functional MRI response to an optokinetic stimulus: Retrospective Study

    Regions of interest will also assess changes in activation with an optokinetic stimulus compared to rest in cortical and subcortical sites that process vestibular information namely the insulo-parietal cortex and hippocampus and sites that process other sensory information namely the visual cortex and somatosensory cortex

    Time frame: 1 time point: 0-10 years post injury

  20. Vestibular Evoked myogenic Potentials latency: Retrospective Study

    Galvanic and Auditory Vestibular Evoked myogenic Potentials (VEMPs) will be assessed and the latency of evoked responses measured in milliseconds.

    Time frame: 1 time point: 0-10 years post injury

  21. Vestibular Evoked myogenic Potentials amplitude: Retrorospective Study

    Galvanic and Auditory Vestibular Evoked myogenic Potentials (VEMPs) will be assessed and the amplitude of evoked responses measured in millivolts.

    Time frame: 1 time point: 0-10 years post injury

07

Study locations

No study locations are listed for this record.

08

References and documents

Publications

  • Gempp E, Louge P. Inner ear decompression sickness in scuba divers: a review of 115 cases. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2013 May;270(6):1831-7. doi: 10.1007/s00405-012-2233-y. Epub 2012 Oct 26. PubMed 23100085 ↗
  • Tremolizzo L, Malpieri M, Ferrarese C, Appollonio I. Inner-ear decompression sickness: 'hubble-bubble' without brain trouble? Diving Hyperb Med. 2015 Jun;45(2):135-6. PubMed 26165540 ↗
  • Mitchell SJ, Doolette DJ. Pathophysiology of inner ear decompression sickness: potential role of the persistent foramen ovale. Diving Hyperb Med. 2015 Jun;45(2):105-10. PubMed 26165533 ↗
  • Landolt JP, Money KE, Topliff ED, Ackles KN, Johnson WH. Induced vestibular dysfunction in squirrel monkeys during rapid decompression. Acta Otolaryngol. 1980;90(1-2):125-9. doi: 10.3109/00016488009131707. PubMed 6969520 ↗
  • Landolt JP, Money KE, Topliff ED, Nicholas AD, Laufer J, Johnson WH. Pathophysiology of inner ear dysfunction in the squirrel monkey in rapid decompression. J Appl Physiol Respir Environ Exerc Physiol. 1980 Dec;49(6):1070-82. doi: 10.1152/jappl.1980.49.6.1070. PubMed 6969248 ↗
  • Kurata N, Kawashima Y, Ito T, Fujikawa T, Nishio A, Honda K, Kanai Y, Terasaki M, Endo I, Tsutsumi T. Advanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging Sheds Light on the Distinct Pathophysiology of Various Types of Acute Sensorineural Hearing Loss. Otol Neurotol. 2023 Aug 1;44(7):656-663. doi: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000003930. Epub 2023 Jun 29. PubMed 37400150 ↗
  • Song CI, Pogson JM, Andresen NS, Ward BK. MRI With Gadolinium as a Measure of Blood-Labyrinth Barrier Integrity in Patients With Inner Ear Symptoms: A Scoping Review. Front Neurol. 2021 May 20;12:662264. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2021.662264. eCollection 2021. PubMed 34093410 ↗
  • Vargas-Figueroa VM, Caceres-Chacon M, Labat EJ. Scuba Diving-Induced Inner-Ear Pathology: Imaging Findings of Superior Semicircular Canal and Tegmen Tympani Dehiscence. Am J Case Rep. 2024 Jan 2;25:e941558. doi: 10.12659/AJCR.941558. PubMed 38163945 ↗
  • Gempp E, Louge P, de Maistre S, Morvan JB, Vallee N, Blatteau JE. Initial Severity Scoring and Residual Deficit in Scuba Divers with Inner Ear Decompression Sickness. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2016 Aug;87(8):735-9. doi: 10.3357/AMHP.4535.2016. PubMed 27634609 ↗
  • Curthoys IS, Halmagyi GM. Vestibular compensation: a review of the oculomotor, neural, and clinical consequences of unilateral vestibular loss. J Vestib Res. 1995 Mar-Apr;5(2):67-107. PubMed 7743004 ↗
  • McDonnell MN, Hillier SL. Vestibular rehabilitation for unilateral peripheral vestibular dysfunction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Jan 13;1(1):CD005397. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005397.pub4. PubMed 25581507 ↗
  • Darlington CL, Smith PF. Molecular mechanisms of recovery from vestibular damage in mammals: recent advances. Prog Neurobiol. 2000 Oct;62(3):313-25. doi: 10.1016/s0301-0082(00)00002-2. PubMed 10840152 ↗
  • Bense S, Bartenstein P, Lochmann M, Schlindwein P, Brandt T, Dieterich M. Metabolic changes in vestibular and visual cortices in acute vestibular neuritis. Ann Neurol. 2004 Nov;56(5):624-30. doi: 10.1002/ana.20244. PubMed 15449325 ↗
  • Hong SK, Kim JH, Kim HJ, Lee HJ. Changes in the gray matter volume during compensation after vestibular neuritis: a longitudinal VBM study. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2014;32(5):663-73. doi: 10.3233/RNN-140405. PubMed 25096973 ↗
  • Helmchen C, Klinkenstein J, Machner B, Rambold H, Mohr C, Sander T. Structural changes in the human brain following vestibular neuritis indicate central vestibular compensation. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2009 May;1164:104-15. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2008.03745.x. PubMed 19645887 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Yes — Following study completion and publication of results anonymous data sets of clinical and laboratory outcome measures will be made available to other research teams on written request.

Supporting information: Study protocol, Statistical analysis plan, Informed consent form

Time frame: Data will become available on study completion and after publication of results.

Access criteria: Access to data will be via written request from other relevant healthcare professionals and research groups.

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reached

Start is estimated for Jun 2024; primary completion for Apr 2028, 46 months later.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Apr 8, 2024
First posted
Apr 17, 2024
StartEst.
Jun 2024
Primary completionEst.
Apr 2028
CompletionEst.
Sep 2028
Last update
May 13, 2024
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on May 13, 2024, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT06370897
Lead sponsor
University of Plymouth
Responsible party
Jon Marsden (Professor of Rehabilitation, University of Plymouth) — Principal investigator
First posted
Apr 17, 2024
Start date
Jun 2024 (estimated)
Primary completion
Apr 2028 (estimated)
Completion
Sep 2028 (estimated)
Last update
May 13, 2024

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in May 2024. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion