Literature DB >> 12799992

Medial olivocochlear efferent reflex in humans: otoacoustic emission (OAE) measurement issues and the advantages of stimulus frequency OAEs.

John J Guinan1, Bradford C Backus, Watjana Lilaonitkul, Vered Aharonson.   

Abstract

Otoacoustic emissions (OAEs) are useful for studying medial olivocochlear (MOC) efferents, but several unresolved methodological issues cloud the interpretation of the data they produce. Most efferent assays use a "probe stimulus" to produce an OAE and an "elicitor stimulus" to evoke efferent activity and thereby change the OAE. However, little attention has been given to whether the probe stimulus itself elicits efferent activity. In addition, most studies use only contralateral ( re the probe) elicitors and do not include measurements to rule out middle-ear muscle (MEM) contractions. Here we describe methods to deal with these problems and present a new efferent assay based on stimulus frequency OAEs (SFOAEs) that incorporates these methods. By using a postelicitor window, we make measurements in individual subjects of efferent effects from contralateral, ipsilateral, and bilateral elicitors. Using our SFOAE assay, we demonstrate that commonly used probe sounds (clicks, tone pips, and tone pairs) elicit efferent activity, by themselves. Thus, results of efferent assays using these probe stimuli can be confounded by unwanted efferent activation. In contrast, the single 40 dB SPL tone used as the probe sound for SFOAE-based measurements evoked little or no efferent activity. Since they evoke efferent activation, clicks, tone pips, and tone pairs can be used in an adaptation efferent assay, but such paradigms are limited in measurement scope compared to paradigms that separate probe and elicitor stimuli. Finally, we describe tests to distinguish middle-ear muscle (MEM) effects from MOC effects for a number of OAE assays and show results from SFOAE-based tests. The SFOAE assay used in this study provides a sensitive, flexible, frequency-specific assay of medial efferent activation that uses a low-level probe sound that elicits little or no efferent activity, and thus provides results that can be interpreted without the confound of unintended efferent activation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12799992      PMCID: PMC3202740          DOI: 10.1007/s10162-002-3037-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol        ISSN: 1438-7573


  38 in total

1.  Sinusoidal amplitude modulation alters contralateral noise suppression of evoked otoacoustic emissions in humans.

Authors:  S Maison; C Micheyl; L Collet
Journal:  Neuroscience       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 3.590

2.  Medial olivocochlear efferent reflex in humans: otoacoustic emission (OAE) measurement issues and the advantages of stimulus frequency OAEs.

Authors:  John J Guinan; Bradford C Backus; Watjana Lilaonitkul; Vered Aharonson
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2003-06-13

3.  Effect of contralateral acoustic stimulation on active cochlear micromechanical properties in human subjects: dependence on stimulus variables.

Authors:  E Veuillet; L Collet; R Duclaux
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1991-03       Impact factor: 2.714

4.  Physiology and anatomy of single olivocochlear neurons in the cat.

Authors:  M C Liberman; M C Brown
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1986       Impact factor: 3.208

5.  Asymmetries in the acoustic reflexes of the cat stapedius muscle.

Authors:  J J Guinan; M P McCue
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 3.208

6.  Patterns of innervation of outer hair cells in a chimpanzee: I. Afferent and reciprocal synapses.

Authors:  H W Francis; J B Nadol
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 3.208

7.  Binaural noise suppresses linear click-evoked otoacoustic emissions more than ipsilateral or contralateral noise.

Authors:  C I Berlin; L J Hood; A E Hurley; H Wen; D T Kemp
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 3.208

8.  Contralateral suppression of non-linear click-evoked otoacoustic emissions.

Authors:  C I Berlin; L J Hood; H Wen; P Szabo; R P Cecola; P Rigby; D F Jackson
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 3.208

9.  Acetylcholine activates two currents in guinea-pig outer hair cells.

Authors:  M G Evans
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1996-03-01       Impact factor: 5.182

10.  Time-varying alterations in the f2-f1 DPOAE response to continuous primary stimulation. I: Response characterization and contribution of the olivocochlear efferents.

Authors:  S G Kujawa; M Fallon; R P Bobbin
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 3.208

View more
  84 in total

1.  Current aspects of hearing loss from occupational and leisure noise.

Authors:  S Plontke; H-P Zenner
Journal:  GMS Curr Top Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2004-12-28

2.  Contralateral-noise effects on cochlear responses in anesthetized mice are dominated by feedback from an unknown pathway.

Authors:  Stéphane F Maison; Hajime Usubuchi; Douglas E Vetter; A Bélen Elgoyhen; Steven A Thomas; M Charles Liberman
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2012-04-18       Impact factor: 2.714

3.  Overshoot using very short signal delays.

Authors:  Dennis McFadden; Kyle P Walsh; Edward G Pasanen; Erin M Grenwelge
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Probing cochlear tuning and tonotopy in the tiger using otoacoustic emissions.

Authors:  Christopher Bergevin; Edward J Walsh; JoAnn McGee; Christopher A Shera
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2012-05-29       Impact factor: 1.836

5.  Recovery from on- and off-frequency forward masking in listeners with normal and impaired hearing.

Authors:  Magdalena Wojtczak; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  The middle ear muscle reflex in the diagnosis of cochlear neuropathy.

Authors:  Michelle D Valero; Kenneth E Hancock; M Charles Liberman
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2015-11-30       Impact factor: 3.208

7.  Click-Evoked Auditory Efferent Activity: Rate and Level Effects.

Authors:  Sriram Boothalingam; Julianne Kurke; Sumitrajit Dhar
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2018-05-07

8.  Stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emissions measured with amplitude-modulated suppressor tones (L).

Authors:  Stephen T Neely; Tiffany A Johnson; Cassie A Garner; Michael P Gorga
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Simultaneous measurement of noise-activated middle-ear muscle reflex and stimulus frequency otoacoustic emissions.

Authors:  Shawn S Goodman; Douglas H Keefe
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2006-03-28

10.  Differentiating Middle Ear and Medial Olivocochlear Effects on Transient-Evoked Otoacoustic Emissions.

Authors:  Kendra L Marks; Jonathan H Siegel
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2017-04-21
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.