Effects of ear canal static pressure on the dynamic behaviour of outer and middle ear in newborns

Abstract

Please cite this article as: V. Aithal, J. Kei, C. Driscoll, M. Murakoshi, H. Wada, Effects of ear canal static pressure on the dynamic behaviour of outer and middle ear in newborns, International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10. 1016/j.ijporl.2015.12.006 This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. A c c e p t e d M a n u s c r i p t 3 healthy ears from ears with a conductive condition, but also provide information on the maturation aspects of the outer and middle ear in newborns.

Analysis by finite element method of dynamic characteristics of the external ear canal in neonates

“…The resonance frequencies calculated from Model 3 in each oscillating mode ranged from 274.21 Hz to 319.22 Hz with an average frequency of about 290 Hz (Table 3). These frequencies fell within the range of the low-frequency resonance found in neonates, i.e., about 200-450 Hz (Aithal et al, 2016a(Aithal et al, , 2016b(Aithal et al, , 2015(Aithal et al, , 2014Holte et al, 1991;Keefe et al, 1993;Meyer et al, 1997;Murakoshi et al 2013).…”

“…To extend its versatility, the SFI meter has been redesigned, and SFI tests were performed in neonates. As a result, the SPL was found to show two variations, one at around 0.3 kHz and the other at around 1.2 kHz (Aithal et al, 2016a(Aithal et al, , 2016b(Aithal et al, , 2015(Aithal et al, , 2014Murakoshi et al, 2013). Since the SPL shows a variation at 1.3 0.3 kHz due to the resonance of the middle ear in normal-hearing adults and children (Zhao et al, 2002), the variation found at around 1.3 kHz is probably related to such resonance in neonates.…”

Predictive Accuracy of Sweep Frequency Impedance Technology in Identifying Conductive Conditions in Newborns

“…As illustrated in Figure 1B, Murakoshi et al (2012) and Aithal et al (2016) noted that the second resonance (RF2) disappeared in newborns with middle ear dysfunction while the first resonance (RF1) was not affected. These results indicated that middle ear dysfunction altered the dynamic behavior of the middle ear to such an extent that the second resonance could not be detected using the SFI meter.…”

“…The greatest variations of SPL (DSPL) occur at median frequencies of RF1 and RF2 along the SPL curve (at ambient pressure of 0 daPa) which are considered the RF of the ear canal and middle ear, respectively (Wada et al, 1995;Murakoshi et al, 2013). In comparison, the SFI results for a newborn, who failed in HFT and TEOAE, reveal only one variation at RF1 (Aithal et al, 2016) ( Figure 1B).…”

“…Furthermore, ear canal volume changes from 27% to 75% over a range of 6300 deca Pascal (daPa) in newborns (Qi et al, 2006). In addition to these limitations, measurement of peakcompensated static admittance (Ypc) for the negative tail method introduces artifactual spikes and danger of collapsing the ear canal with negative ear canal pressure (Kei et al, 2007;Aithal et al, 2016;Hunter and Blankenship, 2017). It is also reported that the positive tail method overestimates ear canal volume and is less sensitive to middle ear dysfunction in young infants (Hunter and Blankenship, 2017).…”