Literature DB >> 21131635

Using concha electrodes to measure cochlear microphonic waveforms and auditory brainstem responses.

Ming Zhang1.   

Abstract

During electrocochleography, that is, ECochG or ECoG, a recording electrode can be placed in the ear canal lateral to the tympanic membrane. We designed a concha electrode to record both sinusoidal waveforms of cochlear microphonics (CMs) and auditory brainstem responses (ABRs). The amplitudes of CM waveforms and Wave I or compound action potentials (CAPs) recorded at the concha were greater than those recorded at the mastoid but slightly lower than those recorded at the ear canal. Wave V amplitudes recorded at the concha were greater than those recorded at the ear canal but lower than those recorded at the mastoid. There was not a significant difference between the amplitudes recorded at the concha and at the ear canal. For CM and Wave I or CAP, the latency recorded at the concha was longer than at the canal but shorter than at the mastoid; for Wave V, the reverse was true. However, these differences were not statistically significant and may be due to the distance to response generators. Aside from the advantages that the regular ECoG has over otoacoustic emission (OAE) testing, the concha electrode was also easier and safer to place and may be suitable for children, newborn screening, participants with canal conditions, and remote clinics which could have concerns with the availability and cost of a canal electrode. Using concha electrodes, we also experienced fewer postauricular artifacts than when using a mastoid electrode.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21131635      PMCID: PMC4111405          DOI: 10.1177/1084713810388811

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Trends Amplif        ISSN: 1084-7138


  24 in total

1.  A comparison of extratympanic versus transtympanic recordings in electrocochleography.

Authors:  Y Noguchi; H Nishida; A Komatsuzaki
Journal:  Audiology       Date:  1999 May-Jun

2.  Acoustic evoked response following transection of the eighth nerve in the rat.

Authors:  S K Rosahl; M Tatagiba; A Gharabaghi; C Matthies; M Samii
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 2.216

3.  [Electrocochleographic potential pattern, recorded by different pick-ups (author's transl)].

Authors:  C Zöllner; T Karnahl
Journal:  Laryngol Rhinol Otol (Stuttg)       Date:  1975-08

4.  Association between surgical steps and intraoperative auditory brainstem response and electrocochleography waveforms during hearing preservation vestibular schwannoma surgery.

Authors:  Haralampos Gouveris; Wolf Mann
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2008-06-14       Impact factor: 2.503

5.  Electrocochleographic effects of ear canal pressure change.

Authors:  J A Ferraro; R R Nunes; I K Arenberg
Journal:  Am J Otol       Date:  1989-01

6.  An ear-canal electrode for the measurement of the human auditory brain stem response.

Authors:  J L Yanz; H J Dodds
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  1985 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.570

7.  Effects of electrode placement on the auditory brainstem response using ear canal electrodes.

Authors:  R C Beattie; L A Lipp
Journal:  Am J Otol       Date:  1990-09

8.  [Clinical and audiological findings in children with auditory neuropathy].

Authors:  W Shehata-Dieler; C Völter; A Hildmann; H Hildmann; J Helms
Journal:  Laryngorhinootologie       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 1.057

9.  Latency and amplitude effects of electrode placement on the early auditory evoked response.

Authors:  R C Beattie; F E Beguwala; D M Mills; R L Boyd
Journal:  J Speech Hear Disord       Date:  1986-02

10.  Auditory brainstem responses in children with otitis media with effusion.

Authors:  T J Fria; D L Sabo
Journal:  Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl       Date:  1980 May-Jun
View more
  4 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.  Hearing Assessment in Zebrafish During the First Week Postfertilization.

Authors:  Qi Yao; Alexandra A DeSmidt; Mustafa Tekin; Xuezhong Liu; Zhongmin Lu
Journal:  Zebrafish       Date:  2016-01-26       Impact factor: 1.985

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

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

4.  Comparison of Cochlear Microphonics Magnitude with Broad and Narrow Band Stimuli in Healthy Adult Wistar Rats.

Authors:  Fatemeh Heidari Phd; Akram Pourbakht; Seyed Kamran Kamrava; Mohammad Kamali; Abbas Yousefi
Journal:  Iran J Child Neurol       Date:  2018
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.