Cortical auditory evoked potential (P1): A potential objective indicator for auditory rehabilitation outcome

Long latency auditory evoked potentials in children with cochlear implants: systematic review

“…The third study analyzed a population of children aged between 4 and 11 years old, diagnosed with auditory neuropathy, who were already wearing the CI, and P1 latency was about 97 and 134 ms for children with good and bad performances in speech perception tests, respectively (26) . Finally, latency values of about 94 and 129 ms were observed for children with adequate or inadequate rehabilitation, respectively (27) . In the studies that described P1 latency values, it was observed that data suggested in the literature are very variable.…”

“…The results obtained by the selected studies have demonstrated, in general, that decreased P1 latency values with the use of CI, which turns the CAEP analysis into a useful tool to analyze the cortical maturation in implanted children, so it can be used as a biomarker that is able to assess the development of cortical auditory pathways and assist in the surgical conduct and in the monitoring of auditory rehabilitation (21,22,27) . Despite that, the presentation of wave latency values is not clearly reported.…”

“…It was observed that, in the first group, latency values were lower, while the amplitude of a wave was larger in relation to the second group. The authors concluded that the CAEP evaluation can be a useful clinical tool to verify auditory rehabilitation (27) . The analysis leads to the conclusion that decreased P1 latency values among children who wear the CI reflect directly on the velocity of cortical reorganization, and that the maturation of auditory pathways result in the faster development of auditory and linguistic skills.…”

“…Among these, three analyzed two cases (5,13,21) , one assessed three cases (22) , and one analyzed four cases (23) . Eight studies assessed a larger sample: from 14 to 79 participants (18,20,21,(24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29) . Among these, only three had a control group (18,28,29) .…”

“…Among these, only three had a control group (18,28,29) . Concerning the aspects of type of study, there were seven longitudinal analyses (5,(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)29) and six cross-sectional studies (13,18,20,(26)(27)(28) . Five studies combined the results of the CAEP electrophysiological tests with behavioral assessments, indicating that the decreased P1 latency is correlated with the improved communication behaviors (vocalization) (5) , improvement of speech and language skills (22) , and improvement of speech among children (13,26,29) .…”