Variability in the Depression of Cochlear Microphonic Responses after Noise Exposure

Legouix, J. P.; Joannes, Maud; Saulnier, Catalina Galán y

doi:10.3109/00206098509070106

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These finding implies that low‐frequency band‐noise might cause more damages on outer hair cells (OHCs) than high‐frequency band‐noise did, so that larger reduction in the amplitude of CM at 0.5 or 2 kHz was observed in group 2. Our finding was consistent with other study, in which CM was found to be severely affected by low‐frequency noise exposure 19 …”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 94%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The relationship between round window and ear canal Cochlear microphonic

Liu

Antisdel

et al. 2022

Laryngoscope Investig Oto

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hypothesis: Cochlear microphonic recorded at ear canal (CM-EC) can be a substitute for the one recorded at round window (CM-RW).Background: Almost all clinics do not measure tone-burst evoked CM due to technical difficulty although it can provide more information than click evoked CM. Moreover, clinicians like the CM-EC more than that measured at CM-RW because CM-EC is non-invasive. There is difference between CM-RW and CM-EC, for example, CM-EC is less prominent than CM-RW, therefore, studying tone-burst evoked CM-EC and its relationship with CM-RW are highly significant and can promote the clinical application of CM-EC.Method: Nine guinea pigs were randomly allocated into three groups, group 1 was not exposed to noise, called normal control. group 2 and group 3 were exposed to the low-(0.5-2 kHz) and high-frequency band-noise (6-8 kHz) at 120 dB SPL for 1 h, respectively. It was difficulty to record low-frequency CM due to severe environmental interruption, in current study the recording technology of tone-burst evoked CM

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 94%

“…Our finding was consistent with other study, in which CM was found to be severely affected by low‐frequency noise exposure. 19 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The relationship between round window and ear canal Cochlear microphonic

Liu

Antisdel

et al. 2022

Laryngoscope Investig Oto

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some authors consider that there is variability in the depression of CM responses during certain situations such as after noise exposure (17). Despite the low CM amplitudes found in our patients compared with those of normal hearing subjects, CM output was recorded in all patients, but without statistically significant differences between the different amplitudes within the same disease group or between the two disease groups.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 76%

Neurophysiological changes in sudden deafness and in progressive sensorineural hearing loss patients studied by electrocochleography

Selmani

Pyykkö

Ashammakhi

2004

Audiological Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sudden deafness (SD) and progressive sensorineural hearing loss (PSNHL) are two different disease entities. SD is an obscure entity with diverse causes, complex pathophysiology and course. Progressive SNHL has often clear aetiology but both diseases require investigation. The aim of this study was to investigate the cochlear neurophysiological changes occurring in SD and in PSNHL by the use of electrocochleography (ECoG). 11 patients with SD related to cochlear failure (mean age 58.6 years) presented with either unilateral (n = 10) or bilateral (n = 1) SD and 31 patients (mean age 54.6 years) with progressive SNHL were studied. Transtympanic ECoG and conventional audiometry were performed. Action potential (AP), summating potential to action potential (SP/AP) ratio, and cochlear microphonic (CM) output were evaluated and compared with pure tone average air conduction thresholds (PTA). Four SD patients (36.3%) with severe hearing loss had SP/AP > 30% indicating the presence of endolymphatic hydrops (EH), whereas four patients with PSNHL (12.5%) had EH. AP amplitudes correlated in both diseases (SD (r = À0.7, p < 0.05), SNHL (r = 0.4, p < 0.05)) with hearing threshold level (AP decreased when hearing threshold decreased). There was no significant difference between the amplitudes of the CM output, which reflects the functional integrity of OHCs, and the levels of hearing threshold within the disease groups, nor between the two disease groups. ECoG was successful in determining the presence of EH in SD and in some patients with progressive SNHL. CM output showed no specific pathophysiological difference in the function of outer hair cells between SD and PSNHL groups. ECoG was a limited investigative tool to provide all information about the functional status of the cochlea in patients with sudden deafness and in patients with progressive SNHL.

show abstract

The Evaluation of Frequency Specific Cochlear Damage: Measurement of Low Frequency Hearing Function

Yu¹

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Variability in the Depression of Cochlear Microphonic Responses after Noise Exposure

Cited by 3 publications

References 9 publications

The relationship between round window and ear canal Cochlear microphonic

The relationship between round window and ear canal Cochlear microphonic

Neurophysiological changes in sudden deafness and in progressive sensorineural hearing loss patients studied by electrocochleography

The Evaluation of Frequency Specific Cochlear Damage: Measurement of Low Frequency Hearing Function

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About