Brainstem auditory evoked potentials combined with electrocochleogram in microvascular decompression
10.3760/cma.j.cn115354-20210322-00184
- VernacularTitle:脑干听觉诱发电位联合耳蜗电图监测在显微血管减压术中的应用
- Author:
Hongxiang REN
1
;
Li ZHANG
;
Weihao JIANG
;
Hongpeng LU
;
Yulian ZHANG
;
Jingxuan MA
;
Yanbing YU
Author Information
1. 国家卫健委中日友好医院神经外科，北京 100029
- Keywords:
Electrocochleogram;
Brainstem auditory evoked potential;
Hemifacial spasm;
Microvascular decompression
- From:
Chinese Journal of Neuromedicine
2021;20(6):571-577
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To investigate the value of brainstem auditory evoked potential (BAEPs) combined with cochlear electrogram (ECochG) monitoring in the protection of auditory function during microvascular decompression (MVD) for patients with facial spasm (HFS).Methods:Clinical data of 908 patients with HFS who received MVD treatment in our hospital from January 2018 to December 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into BAEPs group ( n=309), ECochG group ( n=301) and BAEPs+ECochG group ( n=298) according to the different methods of auditory nerve function monitoring. Waveform extraction rate, mean extraction time, amplitude, latency, intraoperative warning effect of 3 monitoring methods, as well as hearing status immediately after surgery and during follow-up were compared in patents from the 3 groups. Results:(1) The overall waveform extraction rate in ECochG group and BAEPs+ECochG group was significantly higher than that in BAEPs group, and the average waveform extraction time in ECochG group and BAEPs+ECochG group was significantly shorter than that in BAEPs group ( P<0.05). The amplitude of compound action potential (CAP) wave in ECochG group was significantly higher than that of V wave in BAEPs group, and the latency of CAP wave was also significantly earlier than that of V wave ( P< 0.05). (2) A total of 48 patients of the 288 patients in the BAEPs group showed warning signs; a total of 73 of the 292 patients in the ECochG group showed warning signs; and a total of 65 of the 292 patients in the BAEPs+ECochG group showed warning signs. (3) There was significant difference in hearing grading (American Association of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery [AAO-HNS] grading) among the 3 groups immediately after surgery ( H=18.041, P=0.000), and the average rank suggested that the hearing of patients in the BAEPs+ECochG group was superior to the other two groups. All patients were followed up for an average of 15 months (ranged 3-24 months); there was still a significant difference in AAO-HNS grading among the 3 groups ( H=29.625, P=0.000), and the hearing of patients in the BAEPs+ECochG group was still superior to the other two groups. Conclusion:The combined application of ECochG and BAEPs monitoring can reflect the changes of intraoperative hearing impairment comprehensively, accurately and timely, which is of great significance for the protection of auditory function in HFS patients during MVD.
