Literature DB >> 11698798

Characteristics of tone burst-evoked myogenic potentials in the sternocleidomastoid muscles.

M S Welgampola1, J G Colebatch.   

Abstract

HYPOTHESIS: Optimum stimulus parameters for tone burst-evoked myogenic responses can be defined. These optimized responses will be similar to those evoked by clicks in the same subjects.
BACKGROUND: Loud tones give rise to myogenic responses in the anterior neck muscles, similar to click-evoked potentials, and are likely to be saccular in origin.
METHODS: Tone burst-evoked and click-evoked myogenic potentials were measured from the sternocleidomastoid muscles of 12 normal subjects (6 men, 6 women) during tonic activation. The effects of tone burst frequency and duration were systematically investigated. Thresholds were measured and compared with click thresholds for the same subjects. Patients with specific lesions were studied using both stimuli.
RESULTS: Tone burst-evoked responses showed frequency tuning, with the largest reflex amplitudes at either 500 Hz or 1 kHz. As the stimulus duration was increased, using a constant repetition rate, there was an increase in the reflex amplitudes followed by a decline. The overall optimum stimulus duration was 7 milliseconds. The mean tone burst threshold was 114.4-dB sound pressure level. Stimulus thresholds for click-evoked and tone burst-evoked responses were significantly correlated. Tone burst-evoked and click-evoked responses were present after stimulation of the affected ears of subjects with profound sensorineural hearing loss. Four subjects who had previously undergone vestibular neurectomy had an absence of click and tone burst-evoked responses on the side of the lesion, confirming their vestibular dependence.
CONCLUSION: Tone burst-evoked myogenic responses are similar to click-evoked responses but require lower absolute stimulus intensities. To be certain of an optimum response, a stimulus duration of 7 milliseconds, an adequate intensity, and frequencies of both 500 Hz and 1 kHz should be used.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11698798     DOI: 10.1097/00129492-200111000-00014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Otol Neurotol        ISSN: 1531-7129            Impact factor:   2.311


  28 in total

1.  Vestibular activation by bone conducted sound.

Authors:  M S Welgampola; S M Rosengren; G M Halmagyi; J G Colebatch
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 10.154

2.  Comparison of tone burst versus logon stimulation for vestibular evoked myogenic potentials.

Authors:  Ali Ozdek; Omer Bayır; Emel Cadallı Tatar; Mehmet Hakan Korkmaz
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2011-10-05       Impact factor: 2.503

Review 3.  Vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials eliciting: an overview.

Authors:  Anna Eleftheriadou; Eleftherios Koudounarakis
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2010-10-21       Impact factor: 2.503

4.  Novel subtype of idiopathic bilateral vestibulopathy: bilateral absence of vestibular evoked myogenic potentials in the presence of normal caloric responses.

Authors:  Chisato Fujimoto; Toshihisa Murofushi; Yasuhiro Chihara; Mitsuya Suzuki; Tatsuya Yamasoba; Shinichi Iwasaki
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  2009-05-12       Impact factor: 4.849

5.  Tuning of the ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potential (oVEMP) to AC sound shows two separate peaks.

Authors:  Alexander S Zhang; Sendhil Govender; James G Colebatch
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-06-30       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Vestibular Evoked Myographic Correlation.

Authors:  Bernd Lütkenhöner
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2018-11-12

7.  Differential effects of duration for ocular and cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potentials evoked by air- and bone-conducted stimuli.

Authors:  Louis J Z Lim; Danielle L Dennis; Sendhil Govender; James G Colebatch
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2012-11-16       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  Tuning of the ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potential (oVEMP) to air- and bone-conducted sound stimulation in superior canal dehiscence.

Authors:  Alexander S Zhang; Sendhil Govender; James G Colebatch
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2012-09-02       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Startle responses elicited by whiplash perturbations.

Authors:  Jean-Sébastien Blouin; J Timothy Inglis; Gunter P Siegmund
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2006-03-31       Impact factor: 5.182

10.  Saccular function less affected than canal function in bilateral vestibulopathy.

Authors:  Vera C Zingler; Eva Weintz; Klaus Jahn; Kai Bötzel; Judith Wagner; Doreen Huppert; Andrea Mike; Thomas Brandt; Michael Strupp
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  2008-09-26       Impact factor: 4.849

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.