Literature DB >> 15464306

Temporary DPOAE level shifts, ABR threshold shifts and histopathological damage following below-critical-level noise exposures.

Gary W Harding1, Barbara A Bohne.   

Abstract

DPOAE temporary level shift (TLS) at 2f(1)-f(2) and f(2)-f(1), ABR temporary threshold shift (TTS), and detailed histopathological findings were compared in three groups of chinchillas that were exposed for 24 h to an octave band of noise (OBN) centered at 4 kHz with a sound pressure level (SPL) of 80, 86 or 92 dB (n=3,4,6). DPOAE levels at 39 frequencies from f(1)=0.3 to 16 kHz (f(2)/f(1)=1.23; L(2) and L(1)=55, 65 and 75 dB, equal and differing by 10 dB) and ABR thresholds at 13 frequencies from 0.5 to 20 kHz were collected pre- and immediately post-exposure. The functional data were converted to pre- minus post-exposure shift and overlaid upon the cytocochleogram of cochlear damage using the frequency-place map for the chinchilla. The magnitude and frequency place of components in the 2f(1)-f(2) TLS patterns were determined and group averages for each OBN SPL and L(1), L(2) combination were calculated. The f(2)-f(1) TLS was also examined in ears with focal lesions equal to or greater than 0.4 mm. The 2f(1)-f(2) TLS (plotted at f(1)) and TTS aligned with the extent and location of damaged supporting cells. The TLS patterns over frequency had two features which were unexpected: (1) a peak at about a half octave above the center of the OBN with a valley just above and below it and (2) a peak (often showing enhancement) at the apical boundary of the supporting-cell damage. The magnitudes of the TLS and TTS generally increased with increasing SPL of the exposure. The peaks of the TLS and TTS, as well as the peaks and valleys of the TLS pattern moved apically as the SPL of the OBN was increased. However, there was little consistency in the pattern relations with differing L(1), L(2) combinations. In addition, neither the 2f(1)-f(2) nor f(2)-f(1) TLS for any L(1), L(2) combination reliably detected focal lesions (100% OHC loss) from 0.4 to 1.2 mm in size. Often, the TLS went in the opposite direction from what would be expected at focal lesions. Recovery from TLS and TTS was also examined in seven animals. Both TLS and TTS recovered partially or completely, the magnitude depending upon exposure SPL.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15464306     DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2004.03.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hear Res        ISSN: 0378-5955            Impact factor:   3.208


  11 in total

1.  Local cochlear damage reduces local nonlinearity and decreases generator-type cochlear emissions while increasing reflector-type emissions.

Authors:  Wei Dong; Elizabeth S Olson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Meta-Analysis of Distortion Product Otoacoustic Emission Retest Variability for Serial Monitoring of Cochlear Function in Adults.

Authors:  Kelly M Reavis; Garnett P McMillan; Marilyn F Dille; Dawn Konrad-Martin
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2015 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.570

3.  Recovery of otoacoustic emissions after high-level noise exposure in the American bullfrog.

Authors:  Dwayne D Simmons; Rachel Lohr; Helena Wotring; Miriam D Burton; Rebecca A Hooper; Richard A Baird
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2014-02-05       Impact factor: 3.312

4.  Adaptation of distortion product otoacoustic emissions predicts susceptibility to acoustic over-exposure in alert rabbits.

Authors:  Anne E Luebke; Barden B Stagner; Glen K Martin; Brenda L Lonsbury-Martin
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Noise and Vibration in the Vivarium: Recommendations for Developing a Measurement Plan.

Authors:  Jeremy G Turner
Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci       Date:  2020-09-14       Impact factor: 1.232

6.  Effect of infrasound on cochlear damage from exposure to a 4 kHz octave band of noise.

Authors:  Gary W Harding; Barbara A Bohne; Steve C Lee; Alec N Salt
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2007-01-19       Impact factor: 3.208

7.  Distortion product otoacoustic emissions: Sensitive measures of tympanic -membrane perforation and healing processes in a gerbil model.

Authors:  Wei Dong; Glenna Stomackin; Xiaohui Lin; Glen K Martin; Timothy T Jung
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2019-01-23       Impact factor: 3.208

8.  Persistent Auditory Nerve Damage Following Kainic Acid Excitotoxicity in the Budgerigar (Melopsittacus undulatus).

Authors:  Kenneth S Henry; Kristina S Abrams
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2018-05-09

9.  Correlation of Histomorphometric Changes with Diffusion Tensor Imaging for Evaluation of Blast-Induced Auditory Neurodegeneration in Chinchilla.

Authors:  Kathiravan Kaliyappan; Johan Nakuci; Marilena Preda; Ferdinand Schweser; Sarah Muldoon; Vijaya Prakash Krishnan Muthaiah
Journal:  J Neurotrauma       Date:  2021-12       Impact factor: 5.269

10.  Influence of Acoustic Overstimulation on the Central Auditory System: An Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) Study.

Authors:  Tomasz Wolak; Katarzyna Cieśla; Mateusz Rusiniak; Adam Piłka; Monika Lewandowska; Agnieszka Pluta; Henryk Skarżyński; Piotr H Skarżyński
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2016-11-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.