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*

Objective The tests of three types of auditory evoked potentials （AEPs） were performed on normal young adults, to understand the frequency characteristics of different testing methods and the relationship between response threshold and pure tone audiometry threshold of different methods, and to discuss the forensic value of 3 types of AEPs to evaluate hearing function. Methods Twenty normal young adults were selected, their standard pure tone audiometry threshold, short-term pure tone audiometry threshold and the response threshold of 3 types of AEPs （tone burst-auditory brainstem response, 40 Hz auditory event-related potential and slow vertex response） at 0.5 kHz, 1.0 kHz, 2.0 kHz and 4.0 kHz were recorded. The relationship between the response threshold and standard pure tone audiometry threshold, short-term pure tone audiometry threshold of 3 types of AEPs at different frequencies as well as the differences between different types of AEPs were analyzed. Results The short-term pure tone audiometry threshold was higher than the standard pure tone audiometry threshold at each frequency. The response threshold and standard pure tone audiometry threshold of the 3 types of AEPs all had a certain correlation, and the response threshold of the 3 types of AEPs was higher than short-term pure tone audiometry threshold and standard pure tone audiometry threshold at each frequency. The differences in the differences between the response threshold and standard pure tone audiometry threshold of the 3 types of AEPs at different frequencies had statistical significance. Linear regression mathematical models were established to infer the standard pure tone audiometry threshold （hearing level） from response threshold （sound pressure level） of 3 types of AEPs of normal young adults. Conclusion When using response threshold of different types of AEPs to estimate pure tone audiometry threshold, conversion and correction are needed. Combined use of different types of AEPs could improve the accuracy of hearing function evaluation.
Audiometry, Evoked Response ; Audiometry, Pure-Tone ; Auditory Threshold ; Evoked Potentials, Auditory ; Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain Stem ; Hearing ; Humans ; Young Adult

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.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Cochlear microphonic (CM) is an electrical potential generated by outer hair cells in response to acoustic stimulation. The aim of this study is to evaluate the significance of CM in neonatal hearing loss. SUBJECTS AND METHOD: From April 2013 to April 2014, 64 neonates hospitalized in neonatal intensive care unit were enrolled. Subjects underwent transient evoked otoacoustic emission (TEOAE), auditory brain stem response (ABR) and CM. We analyzed the results of hearing tests and the correlation between CM and the other test modalities. RESULTS: Ninety two ears showed normal ABR waves whereas the other 36 ears had abnormal ABR. There were two neonates who were suspected of auditory neuropathy because of the presence of TEOAE and CM. Among 14 ears who showed abnormal OAE results, 12 ears (86%) were identified as having CM. The amplitudes of CMs were correlated with the reproducibility of TEOAE (p<0.005). Between the ears with positive TEOAE and others with negative TEOAE, the amplitudes of CMs were significantly different (p<0.005). CONCLUSION: Many ears were identified with the presence of CM without TEOAE response because of the the vulnerability of OAE from middle ear status and environment. We suppose that CM might provide information on outer hair cell function to complement the OAE in neonatal hearing test.
Acoustic Stimulation ; Cochlear Microphonic Potentials ; Complement System Proteins ; Ear ; Ear, Middle ; Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain Stem ; Hair ; Hearing Loss ; Hearing Tests* ; Humans ; Infant, Newborn* ; Intensive Care, Neonatal ; Neonatal Screening