Literature DB >> 21699970

Auditory brainstem responses predict auditory nerve fiber thresholds and frequency selectivity in hearing impaired chinchillas.

Kenneth S Henry1, Sushrut Kale, Ryan E Scheidt, Michael G Heinz.   

Abstract

Noninvasive auditory brainstem responses (ABRs) are commonly used to assess cochlear pathology in both clinical and research environments. In the current study, we evaluated the relationship between ABR characteristics and more direct measures of cochlear function. We recorded ABRs and auditory nerve (AN) single-unit responses in seven chinchillas with noise-induced hearing loss. ABRs were recorded for 1-8 kHz tone burst stimuli both before and several weeks after 4 h of exposure to a 115 dB SPL, 50 Hz band of noise with a center frequency of 2 kHz. Shifts in ABR characteristics (threshold, wave I amplitude, and wave I latency) following hearing loss were compared to AN-fiber tuning curve properties (threshold and frequency selectivity) in the same animals. As expected, noise exposure generally resulted in an increase in ABR threshold and decrease in wave I amplitude at equal SPL. Wave I amplitude at equal sensation level (SL), however, was similar before and after noise exposure. In addition, noise exposure resulted in decreases in ABR wave I latency at equal SL and, to a lesser extent, at equal SPL. The shifts in ABR characteristics were significantly related to AN-fiber tuning curve properties in the same animal at the same frequency. Larger shifts in ABR thresholds and ABR wave I amplitude at equal SPL were associated with greater AN threshold elevation. Larger reductions in ABR wave I latency at equal SL, on the other hand, were associated with greater loss of AN frequency selectivity. This result is consistent with linear systems theory, which predicts shorter time delays for broader peripheral frequency tuning. Taken together with other studies, our results affirm that ABR thresholds and wave I amplitude provide useful estimates of cochlear sensitivity. Furthermore, comparisons of ABR wave I latency to normative data at the same SL may prove useful for detecting and characterizing loss of cochlear frequency selectivity.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21699970      PMCID: PMC3179834          DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2011.06.002

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


  36 in total

1.  Auditory-nerve rate responses are inconsistent with common hypotheses for the neural correlates of loudness recruitment.

Authors:  Michael G Heinz; John B Issa; Eric D Young
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2005-06-10

2.  Tonotopic distribution of short-term adaptation properties in the cochlear nerve of normal and acoustically overexposed chicks.

Authors:  Mark A Crumling; James C Saunders
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2007-01-03

3.  Effect of auditory-nerve response variability on estimates of tuning curves.

Authors:  Ananthakrishna Chintanpalli; Michael G Heinz
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Effects of selective inner hair cell loss on auditory nerve fiber threshold, tuning and spontaneous and driven discharge rate.

Authors:  J Wang; N L Powers; P Hofstetter; P Trautwein; D Ding; R Salvi
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1997-05       Impact factor: 3.208

5.  Effects of ketamine anesthesia on the rat brain-stem auditory evoked potential as a function of dose and stimulus intensity.

Authors:  M W Church; R Gritzke
Journal:  Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  1987-12

Review 6.  Cochlear delays and traveling waves: comments on 'Experimental look at cochlear mechanics'.

Authors:  M A Ruggero
Journal:  Audiology       Date:  1994 May-Jun

7.  The effects of sensory hearing loss on cochlear filter times estimated from auditory brainstem response latencies.

Authors:  M Don; C W Ponton; J J Eggermont; B Kwong
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Auditory brainstem and middle latency responses to 1 khz tones in noise-masked normally-hearing and sensorineurally hearing-impaired adults.

Authors:  J K Nousak; David R Stapells
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 2.117

9.  Quantitative relationship of carboplatin dose to magnitude of inner and outer hair cell loss and the reduction in distortion product otoacoustic emission amplitude in chinchillas.

Authors:  P Hofstetter; D Ding; N Powers; R J Salvi
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 3.208

10.  The effect of isoflurane, halothane and pentobarbital on noise-induced hearing loss in mice.

Authors:  Jong Woo Chung; Joong Ho Ahn; Jong Yang Kim; Hyun Jung Lee; Hun Hee Kang; Yoon Kyung Lee; Joung Uk Kim; Seung-Woo Koo
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 5.108

View more
  20 in total

1.  Paired measurements of cochlear function and hair cell count in Dutch-belted rabbits with noise-induced hearing loss.

Authors:  Hariprakash Haragopal; Ryan Dorkoski; Holly M Johnson; Mark A Berryman; Soichi Tanda; Mitchell L Day
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2019-11-15       Impact factor: 3.208

2.  Methylmercury Exposure Reduces the Auditory Brainstem Response of Zebra Finches (Taeniopygia guttata ).

Authors:  Sarah E Wolf; John P Swaddle; Daniel A Cristol; William J Buchser
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2017-03-30

3.  Tone-burst auditory brainstem response wave V latencies in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired ears.

Authors:  James D Lewis; Judy Kopun; Stephen T Neely; Kendra K Schmid; Michael P Gorga
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Sensorineural hearing loss amplifies neural coding of envelope information in the central auditory system of chinchillas.

Authors:  Ziwei Zhong; Kenneth S Henry; Michael G Heinz
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2013-12-04       Impact factor: 3.208

5.  Mitigation of Hearing Damage After Repeated Blast Exposures in Animal Model of Chinchilla.

Authors:  Shangyuan Jiang; Paige Welch; Sarah Sanders; Rong Z Gan
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2022-07-29

6.  Distorted Tonotopy Severely Degrades Neural Representations of Connected Speech in Noise following Acoustic Trauma.

Authors:  Satyabrata Parida; Michael G Heinz
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2022-01-04       Impact factor: 6.709

7.  Cutting Through the Noise: Noise-Induced Cochlear Synaptopathy and Individual Differences in Speech Understanding Among Listeners With Normal Audiograms.

Authors:  Mishaela DiNino; Lori L Holt; Barbara G Shinn-Cunningham
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2022 Jan/Feb       Impact factor: 3.562

8.  Noninvasive Measures of Distorted Tonotopic Speech Coding Following Noise-Induced Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Satyabrata Parida; Michael G Heinz
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2020-11-13

9.  Alterations in peripheral and central components of the auditory brainstem response: a neural assay of tinnitus.

Authors:  Andrea S Lowe; Joseph P Walton
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-02-19       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Diminished temporal coding with sensorineural hearing loss emerges in background noise.

Authors:  Kenneth S Henry; Michael G Heinz
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2012-09-09       Impact factor: 24.884

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.