Literature DB >> 19194291

Effects of negative middle ear pressure on distortion product otoacoustic emissions and application of a compensation procedure in humans.

Xiao-Ming Sun1, Mark D Shaver.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study was intended to systematically examine the effect of negative middle ear pressure (MEP) on distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) and to validate a compensation procedure to account for negative MEP encountered in DPOAE measurement.
DESIGN: In experiment 1, the 2f1 - f2 DPOAE was measured for nine f2 frequencies from 600 to 8000 Hz in 16 adults under three MEP conditions: normal MEP, negative MEP, and compensated MEP. The subjects' voluntarily induced negative MEPs, with magnitudes ranging from -40 to -420 daPa, were measured tympanometrically with the tympanometric peak pressure. Each negative MEP was then compensated for by applying an equivalent amount of negative air pressure into the ear canal. The three MEP conditions were compared in terms of difference in DPOAE level. Experiment 2 was conducted to measure the DPOAE under normal and negative MEP conditions by using a different system with a higher frequency resolution in 19 subjects.
RESULTS: Negative MEP generally attenuated DPOAEs more for low frequencies than for high frequencies. For the frequencies of 1000 Hz and below, the mean DPOAE level was reduced by at least 4 to 6 dB for negative MEPs lower than -100 daPa (i.e., less negative). Reduction of the DPOAE level increased with increasing negative MEP (e.g., 10 to 12 dB for -160 daPa and higher, i.e., more negative). For f2 = 2000, 4000, and 6000 Hz, the effect of negative MEP was not significant. For 3000 Hz, DPOAE-level reduction was significant (e.g., 5 dB for MEP = -70 to -95 daPa and up to 12 dB for -290 to -420 daPa). As a result, a peak at 2000 Hz and a notch at 3000 Hz appeared in the DPOAE change versus frequency function. For 8000 Hz, DPOAE levels tended to increase in high negative MEPs, although the changes were not significant. Intersubject variability in the effect of negative MEP on DPOAEs was large. As the negative MEPs were compensated for, the decreased DPOAE levels were significantly corrected. DPOAEs measured with higher resolution in experiment 2 verified the frequency-specific effects of negative MEPs. Results revealed that the peak and notch in the DPOAE change versus frequency function shifted toward higher frequencies when negative MEP was increased, and a second peak emerged at a higher frequency.
CONCLUSIONS: Negative MEP substantially decreases DPOAE level for low frequencies and some mid-frequencies but tends to increase DPOAE level for high frequencies. Results suggest that any degree of negative MEP should be corrected to obtain an accurate outcome of DPOAE measurement. The MEP compensation procedure is effective in restoring normal DPOAEs in ears with negative MEPs. Examining changes in DPOAE level under negative MEP allows for further study of the transmission of acoustic signals through an altered middle ear system. A minimal change of DPOAE level at 2000 Hz indicates that the primary resonant frequency of the middle ear is lower than 2000 Hz. The variation in DPOAE change in the middle to high frequency range implies multiple resonances of the middle ear system.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19194291     DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31819769e1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ear Hear        ISSN: 0196-0202            Impact factor:   3.570


  9 in total

1.  Response pattern based on the amplitude of ear canal recorded cochlear microphonic waveforms across acoustic frequencies in normal hearing subjects.

Authors:  Ming Zhang
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2012-06-13

2.  Pressurized transient otoacoustic emissions measured using click and chirp stimuli.

Authors:  Douglas H Keefe; M Patrick Feeney; Lisa L Hunter; Denis F Fitzpatrick; Chris A Sanford
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Posture systematically alters ear-canal reflectance and DPOAE properties.

Authors:  Susan E Voss; Modupe F Adegoke; Nicholas J Horton; Kevin N Sheth; Jonathan Rosand; Christopher A Shera
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2010-03-19       Impact factor: 3.208

4.  Assessing Sensorineural Hearing Loss Using Various Transient-Evoked Otoacoustic Emission Stimulus Conditions.

Authors:  Daniel B Putterman; Douglas H Keefe; Lisa L Hunter; Angela C Garinis; Denis F Fitzpatrick; Garnett P McMillan; M Patrick Feeney
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2017 Jul/Aug       Impact factor: 3.570

5.  Identifying Otosclerosis with Aural Acoustical Tests of Absorbance, Group Delay, Acoustic Reflex Threshold, and Otoacoustic Emissions.

Authors:  Douglas H Keefe; Kelly L Archer; Kendra K Schmid; Denis F Fitzpatrick; M Patrick Feeney; Lisa L Hunter
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 1.664

6.  Relationship Between Distortion Product - Otoacoustic Emissions (DPOAEs) and High-Frequency Acoustic Immittance Measures.

Authors:  Ualace De Paula Campos; Stavros Hatzopoulos; Lech K Śliwa; Piotr H Skarżyński; Wiesław W Jędrzejczak; Henryk Skarżyński; Renata Mota Mamede Carvallo
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2016-06-14

7.  Effects of Dexmedetomidine Infusion During Sevoflurane Anesthesia on Otoacoustic Emissions.

Authors:  Mehmet İlhan Şahin; Alperen Vural; Aynur Akın; İbrahim Ketenci; Yaşar Ünlü
Journal:  J Audiol Otol       Date:  2019-03-13

8.  Effects of Stimulus Intensity on Low-Frequency Toneburst Cochlear Microphonic Waveforms.

Authors:  Ming Zhang
Journal:  Audiol Res       Date:  2013-02-21

9.  Contrasting Effects of Pressure Compensation on TEOAE and DPOAE in Children With Negative Middle Ear Pressure.

Authors:  Snezana A Filipović; Mark P Haggard; Helen Spencer; Goran Trajković
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2018 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.293

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.