Optimizing Auditory Brainstem Response Acquisition Using Interleaved Frequencies

Buran, Brad N.; Elkins, Sean; Kempton, J. Beth; Porsov, Edward; Brigande, John V.; David, Stephen V.

doi:10.1007/s10162-020-00754-3

Cited by 17 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Also, many of the AEP responses measured here originate from early way-stations in the neural chain between the cochlea and auditory cortex (e.g., [ 50 ]), whereas behavioral decisions (surely) arise in the cortex. On the other hand, the idea that AEPs can be revealing about auditory ability has a long history in auditory science e.g., [ 3 , 25 , 26 ], and because the plan was to collect AEPs for other purposes anyway (e.g., to assess sex differences, and for comparisons with OAEs), the comparisons between AEPs and the various psychoacoustical tasks were a fringe benefit. Besides, until the comparisons were made, the pessimistic expectations remained untested.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The absence of even moderate correlations between Wave V and detection of the 3.0-kHz tone in the quiet was a minor surprise (S12 and S13 Tables in S1 File [ 36 ]). From the beginning, one of hearing science’s primary motivations for studying AEPs was the search for objective measures of hearing sensitivity, and various studies concluded that Wave V and behavioral thresholds are reasonably correlated (e.g., [ 3 , 51 , compare 40 , see 26 ]).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(3) Examine the relationships between the various AEP measures and the measures of behavioral performance obtained. Immediately upon their discovery [25], ABRs were recognized as having the potential to serve as objective measures of hearing sensitivity (summarized by [3]), and exploration continues for the optimal procedures for that purpose (e.g., [26]). Because this study involved measuring performance on seven psychoacoustical tasks to see if any task covaried with any OAE measure, we could ask the parallel question of the possible relationship between psychoacoustical task and the AEP measures.…”

Section: A Experimental Objectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Auditory evoked potentials: Differences by sex, race, and menstrual cycle and correlations with common psychoacoustical tasks

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Auditory brainstem responses (ABRs) and auditory middle-latency responses (AMLRs) to a click stimulus were measured in about 100 subjects. Of interest were the sex differences in those auditory evoked potentials (AEPs), the correlations between the various AEP measures, and the correlations between the AEP measures and measures of otoacoustic emissions (OAEs) and behavioral performance also measured on the same subjects. Also of interest was how the menstrual cycle affected the various AEP measures. Most ABR measures and several AMLR measures exhibited sex differences, and many of the former were substantial. The sex differences tended to be larger for latency than for amplitude of the waves, and they tended to be larger for a weak click stimulus than for a strong click. The largest sex difference was for Wave-V latency (effect size ~1.2). When subjects were dichotomized into Non-Whites and Whites, the race differences in AEPs were small within sex. However, sex and race interacted so that the sex differences often were larger for the White subjects than for the Non-White subjects, particularly for the latency measures. Contrary to the literature, no AEP measures differed markedly across the menstrual cycle. Correlations between various AEP measures, and between AEP and OAE measures, were small and showed no consistent patterns across sex or race categories. Performance on seven common psychoacoustical tasks was only weakly correlated with individual AEP measures (just as was true for the OAEs also measured on these subjects). AMLR Wave Pa unexpectedly did not show the decrease in latency and increase in amplitude typically observed for AEPs when click level was varied from 40 to 70 dB nHL (normal Hearing Level). For the majority of the measures, the variability of the distribution of scores was greater for the males than for the females.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A Experimental Objectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Auditory evoked potentials: Differences by sex, race, and menstrual cycle and correlations with common psychoacoustical tasks

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Research groups report using random or systematic stimuli sequences, but the consequences of the choice remain unclear. The compromise between ABR measurement time and the adaptation of the auditory system to ABR signal stimulation is essential in studies analyzing either amplitude or latency of wave I [ 89 ]. One of the solutions to shorten the time required to perform ABR could be using the interleaving tones at different frequencies instead of testing each frequency serially, which was observed in mice and Mongolian gerbils.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reporting Data on Auditory Brainstem Responses (ABR) in Rats: Recommendations Based on Review of Experimental Protocols and Literature

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research in hearing science is accelerating, and a wealth of data concerning auditory brainstem responses (ABR) in various animal models is published in peer-reviewed journals every year. Recently, we reviewed studies using ABR measurements in tinnitus rat models. We found significant discrepancies in the outcomes of these studies, some due to different research approaches and others due to different methodologies. Thus, the present work aimed to collect comprehensive information on all factors influencing ABR recordings in rats and compile recommendations on ABR data reporting. A questionnaire with queries about animal husbandry, transfer, handling, and the exact test conditions before, during, and after ABR recordings was sent to 125 researchers who published the relevant studies between 2015 and 2021. Eighteen researchers provided detailed answers on factors related to ABR measurements. Based on the analysis of the returned questionnaires, we identified three domains reflecting animal-, equipment-, and experiment-dependent factors that might influence the ABR outcome, thus requiring reporting in published research. The analysis of survey results led to the compilation of recommendations for reporting ABR outcomes supported by a literature review. Following these recommendations should facilitate comparative and meta-analyses of ABR results provided by various research groups.

show abstract

“…All animals were anesthetized with ketamine (120 mg/kg) diluted with xylazine (10 mg/kg), which was administered intraperitoneally, and the mouse was place in an audiometric booth. The following ABR stimulus frequencies were tested: 8, 16, 24, and 32 kHz, as reported previously [ 12 ]. TDT’s MF1 Multi-Field Magnetic Speaker was used to optimize the free field utilized to test the hearing range of mice, rats, and guinea pigs [ 13 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficiency of antioxidant Avenanthramide-C on high-dose methotrexate-induced ototoxicity in mice

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Methotrexate (MTX) has been used in treating various types of cancers but can also cause damage to normal organs and cell types. Folinic acid (FA) is a well-known MTX antidote that protects against toxicity caused by the drug and has been used for decades. Since hearing loss caused by MTX treatment is not well studied, herein we aimed to investigate the efficiency of the antioxidant Avenanthramide-C (AVN-C) on high-dose MTX (HDMTX) toxicity in the ear and provide insights into the possible mechanism involved in MTX-induced hearing loss in normal adult C57Bl/6 mice and HEI-OC1 cells. Our results show that the levels of MTX increased in the serum and perilymph 30 minutes after systemic administration. MTX increased hearing thresholds in mice, whereas AVN-C and FA preserved hearing within the normal range. MTX also caused a decrease in wave I amplitude, while AVN-C and FA maintained it at higher levels. MTX considerably damaged the cochlear synapses and neuronal integrity, and both AVN-C and FA rescued the synapses. MTX reduced the cell viability and increased the reactive oxygen species (ROS) level in HEI-OC1 cells, but AVN-C and FA reversed these changes. Apoptosis- and ROS-related genes were significantly upregulated in MTX-treated HEI-OC1 cells; however, they were downregulated by AVN-C and FA treatment. We show that MTX can cause severe hearing loss; it can cross the blood–labyrinth barrier and cause damage to the cochlear neurons and outer hair cells (OHCs). The antioxidant AVN-C exerts a strong protective effect against MTX-induced ototoxicity and preserved the inner ear structures (synapses, neurons, and OHCs) from MTX-induced damage. The mechanism of AVN-C against MTX suggests that ROS is involved in HDMTX-induced ototoxicity.

show abstract

Optimizing Auditory Brainstem Response Acquisition Using Interleaved Frequencies

Cited by 17 publications

References 40 publications

Auditory evoked potentials: Differences by sex, race, and menstrual cycle and correlations with common psychoacoustical tasks

Auditory evoked potentials: Differences by sex, race, and menstrual cycle and correlations with common psychoacoustical tasks

Reporting Data on Auditory Brainstem Responses (ABR) in Rats: Recommendations Based on Review of Experimental Protocols and Literature

Efficiency of antioxidant Avenanthramide-C on high-dose methotrexate-induced ototoxicity in mice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About