No abstract available.
Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain Stem*

No abstract available.
Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain Stem*

No abstract available.
Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain Stem*

No abstract available.
Child* ; Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain Stem* ; Humans

No abstract available.
Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain Stem* ; Humans ; Infant*

No abstract available.
Adult* ; Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain Stem* ; Humans*

No abstract available.
Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain Stem* ; Rabbits*

In order to observe the effects of various click polarity and stimulus rate on brainstem auditory evoked potentials (BAEPs), we measured the absolute latency, interwave latency and amplitude. Variations of IV-V wave complex in different stimulus rate and polarity were also observed. Observations were made on 50 normal subjects(32 males and 18 females) aged 8 to 56. The results are summarized as follows, 1. With rarefaction click stimulation, the absolute latencies of wave I and wave V were shortest, and wave I and wave III amplitudes were most increased as compared with condensation or alternating-polarity. 2. The absolute latencies of wave I and wave V were most prolonged and wave V amplitude was highest with condensation clicks. 3. I - III, III -V and I - V interwave latencies were not significantly changed between any of polarities. 4. By increasing stimulus rate from 10 click / sec to 50 click / sec, absolute and interwave latencies were significantly prolonged. Except wave V amplitude at condensation and alter-nating-polarity clicks, all wave amplitudes were decreased significantly. 5. The waveforms were classified into 5 types according to configuration of IV - V wave complex. At any conditions, type A and B were present most frequently. We proposed that if one is to employ only a single stimulus polarity, rarefaction clicks should be used because this will produce the earliest and largest wave I. Condensation can be used in those cases in whom rarefaction does not produce clar waveforms, or when wave V appears absent. The use of alternating-polarity clicks as the only mode of stimulation is discouraged because of the possibility of phase cancellations.
Brain Stem* ; Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain Stem* ; Humans ; Male

No abstract available.
Brain Stem* ; Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain Stem* ; Humans ; Infant*

OBJECTIVEWe aim to explore the central auditory nervous system (CANS) functioning in children with nonsyndromic cleft palates by analyzing the auditory evoked potentials and event-related potentials (ERP).

METHODSA total of 34 children with nonsyndromic cleft palates were recruited as subjects, and 27 normally developed children were selected as the normal controls. Auditory brainstem response (ABR), middle latency response (MLR), and mismatch negativity (MMN) of ERP were selected as indices to observe the function of CANS in children in both groups.

RESULTSAstatistically significant difference between the groups was obtainedin the MMN recording (F = 227.69, P < 0.01), whereas no significant group differences were obtained in the ABR and MLR results (P > 0.05). Children with nonsyndromic cleft palates showed diminished MMN responses compared with the normal controls, whereas ABR and MLR were within the normal range.

CONCLUSIONChildren with nonsyndromic cleft palates are at risk of central auditory discrimination dysfunction. The significant abnormal event-related potentials recorded in children with cleft palates suggest that the dysfunction of CANS maybe located at the cortical level and normal function of CANS was located at the brain stem and sub-cortical level.