The objective of this study is to provide an overview of the prevalence of vestibular dysfunction in children with SNHL classified according to the applied test and its corresponding sensitivity and specificity.
Data were gathered using a systematic search query including reference screening.
Pubmed, Web of Science and Embase were searched. Strategy and reporting of this review was based on the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines. Methodological quality was assessed with the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist.
All studies, regardless the applied vestibular test, showed that vestibular function differs significantly between children with hearing loss and normal hearing (p < 0.05). Compared with caloric testing, the sensitivity of the Rotational Chair Test (RCT) varies between 61 and 80% and specificity between 21 and 80%, whereas this was, respectively, 71-100% and 30-100% for collic Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potentials (cVEMP). Compared with RCT, the sensitivity was 88-100% and the specificity was 69-100% for the Dynamic Visual Acuity test, respectively, 67-100% and 71-100% for the (video) Head Impulse Test and 83% and 86% for the ocular VEMP.
Currently, due to methodological shortcoming, evidence on sensitivity and specificity of vestibular tests is unknown to moderate. Future research should focus on adequate sample sizes (subgroups >30).

Vestibular function after cochlear implantation is difficult to understand, as subjective vestibular symptoms seem uncorrelated with the results of objective tests. Consequently, clinicians may struggle to decide what assessments to perform for a symptomatic patient. We used a systematic review and meta-analysis approach to enlighten this point. After a study inclusion process, results were classified into four different groups for each test in each study: (1) \'true positive\' if the test showed impairment from pre-operative to post-operative in symptomatic patients; (2) \'false positive\' if the test showed impairment from pre-operative to post-operative in asymptomatic patients; (3) \'true negative\' if the test showed no impairment in asymptomatic patients; and (4) \'false negative\' if the test showed no impairment in symptomatic patients. From these groups, sensitivities and specificities of each test were calculated in a meta-analysis. After reviewing more than 3000 references, 16 studies were included, representing 957 patients. The meta-analysis revealed a sensitivity of 0.21 (CI 95 % 0.08-0.40) for the caloric tests, of 0.32 (CI 95 % 0.15-0.54) for the cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potentials (c-VEMP), and of 0.5 (CI 95 % 0.07-0.93) for the head impulse tests. The analysis of prevalence revealed that c-VEMPs were the most often impaired, and the HIT the most often conserved. Our review and meta-analysis revealed that no vestibular test is sensitive enough to be recommended as a single test. Ideally, all the five vestibular sensors should be tested. In clinical practice, we suggest a case-to-case strategy according to patient\'s symptoms and their suspected origin.