Cargando…

A Comparison of Commercially Available Auditory Brainstem Response Stimuli at a Neurodiagnostic Intensity Level

iChirp-evoked auditory brainstem responses (ABRs) yield a larger wave V amplitude at low intensity levels than traditional broadband click stimuli, providing a reliable estimation of hearing sensitivity. However, advantages of iChirp stimulation at high intensity levels are unknown. We tested to see...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Keesling, Devan A., Parker, Jordan Paige, Sanchez, Jason Tait
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: PAGEPress Publications, Pavia, Italy 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5337818/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28286636
http://dx.doi.org/10.4081/audiores.2017.161
_version_ 1782512445227532288
author Keesling, Devan A.
Parker, Jordan Paige
Sanchez, Jason Tait
author_facet Keesling, Devan A.
Parker, Jordan Paige
Sanchez, Jason Tait
author_sort Keesling, Devan A.
collection PubMed
description iChirp-evoked auditory brainstem responses (ABRs) yield a larger wave V amplitude at low intensity levels than traditional broadband click stimuli, providing a reliable estimation of hearing sensitivity. However, advantages of iChirp stimulation at high intensity levels are unknown. We tested to see if high-intensity (i.e., 85 dBnHL) iChirp stimulation results in larger and more reliable ABR waveforms than click. Using the commercially available Intelligent Hearing System SmartEP platform, we recorded ABRs from 43 normal hearing young adults. We report that absolute peak latencies were more variable for iChirp and were ~3 ms longer: the latter of which is simply due to the temporal duration of the signal. Interpeak latencies were slightly shorter for iChirp and were most evident between waves I-V. Interestingly, click responses were easier to identify and peak-to-trough amplitudes for waves I, III and V were significantly larger than iChirp. These differences were not due to residual noise levels. We speculate that high intensity iChirp stimulation reduces neural synchrony and conclude that for retrocochlear evaluations, click stimuli should be used as the standard for ABR neurodiagnostic testing.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5337818
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher PAGEPress Publications, Pavia, Italy
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53378182017-03-10 A Comparison of Commercially Available Auditory Brainstem Response Stimuli at a Neurodiagnostic Intensity Level Keesling, Devan A. Parker, Jordan Paige Sanchez, Jason Tait Audiol Res Article iChirp-evoked auditory brainstem responses (ABRs) yield a larger wave V amplitude at low intensity levels than traditional broadband click stimuli, providing a reliable estimation of hearing sensitivity. However, advantages of iChirp stimulation at high intensity levels are unknown. We tested to see if high-intensity (i.e., 85 dBnHL) iChirp stimulation results in larger and more reliable ABR waveforms than click. Using the commercially available Intelligent Hearing System SmartEP platform, we recorded ABRs from 43 normal hearing young adults. We report that absolute peak latencies were more variable for iChirp and were ~3 ms longer: the latter of which is simply due to the temporal duration of the signal. Interpeak latencies were slightly shorter for iChirp and were most evident between waves I-V. Interestingly, click responses were easier to identify and peak-to-trough amplitudes for waves I, III and V were significantly larger than iChirp. These differences were not due to residual noise levels. We speculate that high intensity iChirp stimulation reduces neural synchrony and conclude that for retrocochlear evaluations, click stimuli should be used as the standard for ABR neurodiagnostic testing. PAGEPress Publications, Pavia, Italy 2017-02-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5337818/ /pubmed/28286636 http://dx.doi.org/10.4081/audiores.2017.161 Text en ©Copyright D.A. Keesling et al., 2017 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Article
Keesling, Devan A.
Parker, Jordan Paige
Sanchez, Jason Tait
A Comparison of Commercially Available Auditory Brainstem Response Stimuli at a Neurodiagnostic Intensity Level
title A Comparison of Commercially Available Auditory Brainstem Response Stimuli at a Neurodiagnostic Intensity Level
title_full A Comparison of Commercially Available Auditory Brainstem Response Stimuli at a Neurodiagnostic Intensity Level
title_fullStr A Comparison of Commercially Available Auditory Brainstem Response Stimuli at a Neurodiagnostic Intensity Level
title_full_unstemmed A Comparison of Commercially Available Auditory Brainstem Response Stimuli at a Neurodiagnostic Intensity Level
title_short A Comparison of Commercially Available Auditory Brainstem Response Stimuli at a Neurodiagnostic Intensity Level
title_sort comparison of commercially available auditory brainstem response stimuli at a neurodiagnostic intensity level
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5337818/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28286636
http://dx.doi.org/10.4081/audiores.2017.161
work_keys_str_mv AT keeslingdevana acomparisonofcommerciallyavailableauditorybrainstemresponsestimuliataneurodiagnosticintensitylevel
AT parkerjordanpaige acomparisonofcommerciallyavailableauditorybrainstemresponsestimuliataneurodiagnosticintensitylevel
AT sanchezjasontait acomparisonofcommerciallyavailableauditorybrainstemresponsestimuliataneurodiagnosticintensitylevel
AT keeslingdevana comparisonofcommerciallyavailableauditorybrainstemresponsestimuliataneurodiagnosticintensitylevel
AT parkerjordanpaige comparisonofcommerciallyavailableauditorybrainstemresponsestimuliataneurodiagnosticintensitylevel
AT sanchezjasontait comparisonofcommerciallyavailableauditorybrainstemresponsestimuliataneurodiagnosticintensitylevel