F Aksoy1, R Dogan2, A Yenigun3, B Veyseller1, O Ozturan1, B Ozturk4. 1. Department of Otorhinolaryngology,Faculty of Medicine,Bezmialem Vakif University,Istanbul,Turkey. 2. Otorhinolaryngology Clinic,Bayrampasa State Hospital,Istanbul,Turkey. 3. Otorhinolaryngology Clinic,Karaman State Hospital,Istanbul,Turkey. 4. Department of Audiology,Faculty of Health Sciences,Bezmialem Vakif University,Istanbul,Turkey.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether thymoquinone has any eliminative effects against inner-ear damage caused by acoustic trauma. METHODS: Thirty-two male rats were divided into four groups. Group 1 was only exposed to acoustic trauma. Group 2 was given thymoquinone 24 hours before acoustic trauma and continued to receive it for 10 days after the trauma. Group 3 was only treated with thymoquinone, for 10 days. Group 4, the control group, suffered no trauma and received saline instead of thymoquinone. Groups 1 and 2 were exposed to acoustic trauma using 105 dB SPL white noise for 4 hours. RESULTS: There was a significant decrease in distortion product otoacoustic emission values and an increase in auditory brainstem response thresholds in group 1 on days 1, 5 and 10, compared with baseline measurements. In group 2, a decrease in distortion product otoacoustic emission values and an increase in auditory brainstem response threshold were observed on day 1 after acoustic trauma, but measurements were comparable to baseline values on days 5 and 10. In group 3, thymoquinone had no detrimental effects on hearing. Similarly, the control group showed stable results. CONCLUSION: Thymoquinone was demonstrated to be a reparative rather than preventive treatment that could be used to relieve acoustic trauma.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether thymoquinone has any eliminative effects against inner-ear damage caused by acoustic trauma. METHODS: Thirty-two male rats were divided into four groups. Group 1 was only exposed to acoustic trauma. Group 2 was given thymoquinone 24 hours before acoustic trauma and continued to receive it for 10 days after the trauma. Group 3 was only treated with thymoquinone, for 10 days. Group 4, the control group, suffered no trauma and received saline instead of thymoquinone. Groups 1 and 2 were exposed to acoustic trauma using 105 dB SPL white noise for 4 hours. RESULTS: There was a significant decrease in distortion product otoacoustic emission values and an increase in auditory brainstem response thresholds in group 1 on days 1, 5 and 10, compared with baseline measurements. In group 2, a decrease in distortion product otoacoustic emission values and an increase in auditory brainstem response threshold were observed on day 1 after acoustic trauma, but measurements were comparable to baseline values on days 5 and 10. In group 3, thymoquinone had no detrimental effects on hearing. Similarly, the control group showed stable results. CONCLUSION:Thymoquinone was demonstrated to be a reparative rather than preventive treatment that could be used to relieve acoustic trauma.