Cited 24 times in

Relationship Between Electrically Evoked Auditory Brainstem Response and Auditory Performance After Cochlear Implant in Patients With Auditory Neuropathy Spectrum Disorder

Authors
 Ju Hyun Jeon  ;  Mi Ran Bae  ;  Mee Hyun Song  ;  Seung Hwan Noh  ;  Ki Hoon Choi  ;  Jae Young Choi 
Citation
 OTOLOGY & NEUROTOLOGY, Vol.34(7) : 1261-1266, 2013 
Journal Title
OTOLOGY & NEUROTOLOGY
ISSN
 1531-7129 
Issue Date
2013
MeSH
Child ; Child, Preschool ; Cochlear Implantation ; Cochlear Implants* ; Cochlear Microphonic Potentials/physiology ; Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain Stem/physiology* ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Hearing/physiology* ; Humans ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging ; Male ; Otoacoustic Emissions, Spontaneous/physiology ; Peripheral Nervous System Diseases/physiopathology* ; Peripheral Nervous System Diseases/surgery* ; Tomography, X-Ray Computed ; Treatment Outcome ; Vestibulocochlear Nerve Diseases/physiopathology* ; Vestibulocochlear Nerve Diseases/surgery*
Keywords
Auditory neuropathy spectrum disorder ; Auditory performance ; Cochlear implant ; Electrically evoked auditory brainstem response
Abstract
OBJECTIVE:
To analyze the pattern of electrically evoked auditory brainstem response (EABR) in auditory neuropathy spectrum disorder (ANSD) patients and to compare their performances with controls.
STUDY DESIGN:
Retrospective analysis.
SETTING:
Tertiary referral center.
PATIENTS:
Eleven patients with ANSD and 9 control subjects with sensorineural hearing loss who did not have neural pathology.
INTERVENTION:
Diagnostic.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:
Patients and control subjects each received a cochlear implant (CI) and underwent EABR. EABR threshold, wave V latency, and amplitude were measured as EABR parameters. The results of EABR were categorized as good response, variable response, or no response. Speech perception ability was assessed by the categories of auditory performance (CAP) score.
RESULTS:
All controls responded to EABR, whereas 6 of the 11 ANSD patients did not respond to EABR. The EABR threshold of the ANSD patients was measured almost within the value of disease controls. However, the Wave V latency displayed variable lengths, and the amplitude showed a wider distribution compared with the value of the disease control. The EABR response group among the ANSD patients showed relatively good performance after CI. In contrast, the nonresponse group demonstrated variable outcomes, although all of them still benefited from CI.
CONCLUSION:
The data suggested that all ANSD patients require CI and that EABR results can help establish realistic expectations about future performance. Even if electrical stimulation fails to generate sufficiently synchronized signal for eliciting EABR, CI provides at least partial, measurable auditory benefit in ANSD.
Full Text
http://ovidsp.ovid.com/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&CSC=Y&NEWS=N&PAGE=fulltext&AN=00129492-201309000-00017&LSLINK=80&D=ovft
DOI
10.1097/MAO.0b013e318291c632
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Otorhinolaryngology (이비인후과학교실) > 1. Journal Papers
Yonsei Authors
Choi, Jae Young(최재영) ORCID logo https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9493-3458
URI
https://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/88148
사서에게 알리기
  feedback

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Browse

Links