ANSWER AND REASONINGD. Arrange targeted audiological and vascular/temporal-bone imaging through an ENT-led pathway
The manoeuvre suggests a venous contribution but does not establish a benign diagnosis. Imaging should be selected to assess the relevant venous and osseous anatomy.
Why every option is right or wrong
A. Offer reassurance without investigation: Persistent pulsatile tinnitus warrants investigation.
B. Perform only a pure-tone audiogram: Audiology is useful but does not define a vascular cause.
C. Start migraine prophylaxis first: This should not replace structural assessment.
D. Arrange targeted audiological and vascular/temporal-bone imaging through an ENT-led pathway: The manoeuvre suggests a venous contribution but does not establish a benign diagnosis. Imaging should be selected to assess the relevant venous and osseous anatomy.
E. Use carotid Doppler as the sole test: It may miss venous and temporal-bone causes.
What if the scenario changed?
If tinnitus were non-pulsatile, bilateral and associated with symmetrical hearing loss, extensive vascular imaging would be less likely to be first-line.