Literature DB >> 29337760

Using Thresholds in Noise to Identify Hidden Hearing Loss in Humans.

Courtney L Ridley1,2, Judy G Kopun1, Stephen T Neely1, Michael P Gorga1, Daniel M Rasetshwane1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Recent animal studies suggest that noise-induced synaptopathy may underlie a phenomenon that has been labeled hidden hearing loss (HHL). Noise exposure preferentially damages low spontaneous-rate auditory nerve fibers, which are involved in the processing of moderate- to high-level sounds and are more resistant to masking by background noise. Therefore, the effect of synaptopathy may be more evident in suprathreshold measures of auditory function, especially in the presence of background noise. The purpose of this study was to develop a statistical model for estimating HHL in humans using thresholds in noise as the outcome variable and measures that reflect the integrity of sites along the auditory pathway as explanatory variables. Our working hypothesis is that HHL is evident in the portion of the variance observed in thresholds in noise that is not dependent on thresholds in quiet, because this residual variance retains statistical dependence on other measures of suprathreshold function.
DESIGN: Study participants included 13 adults with normal hearing (≤15 dB HL) and 20 adults with normal hearing at 1 kHz and sensorineural hearing loss at 4 kHz (>15 dB HL). Thresholds in noise were measured, and the residual of the correlation between thresholds in noise and thresholds in quiet, which we refer to as thresholds-in-noise residual, was used as the outcome measure for the model. Explanatory measures were as follows: (1) auditory brainstem response (ABR) waves I and V amplitudes; (2) electrocochleographic action potential and summating potential amplitudes; (3) distortion product otoacoustic emissions level; and (4) categorical loudness scaling. All measurements were made at two frequencies (1 and 4 kHz). ABR and electrocochleographic measurements were made at 80 and 100 dB peak equivalent sound pressure level, while wider ranges of levels were tested during distortion product otoacoustic emission and categorical loudness scaling measurements. A model relating the thresholds-in-noise residual and the explanatory measures was created using multiple linear regression analysis.
RESULTS: Predictions of thresholds-in-noise residual using the model accounted for 61% (p < 0.01) and 48% (p < 0.01) of the variance in the measured thresholds-in-noise residual at 1 and 4 kHz, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Measures of thresholds in noise, the summating potential to action potential ratio, and ABR waves I and V amplitudes may be useful for the prediction of HHL in humans. With further development, our approach of quantifying HHL by the variance that remains in suprathreshold measures of auditory function after removing the variance due to thresholds in quiet, together with our statistical modeling, may provide a quantifiable and verifiable estimate of HHL in humans with normal hearing and with hearing loss. The current results are consistent with the view that inner hair cell and auditory nerve pathology may underlie suprathreshold auditory performance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29337760      PMCID: PMC6046280          DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000543

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


  74 in total

1.  Age-related cochlear synaptopathy: an early-onset contributor to auditory functional decline.

Authors:  Yevgeniya Sergeyenko; Kumud Lall; M Charles Liberman; Sharon G Kujawa
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2013-08-21       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Normal hearing is not enough to guarantee robust encoding of suprathreshold features important in everyday communication.

Authors:  Dorea Ruggles; Hari Bharadwaj; Barbara G Shinn-Cunningham
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-08-15       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Tinnitus with a normal audiogram: physiological evidence for hidden hearing loss and computational model.

Authors:  Roland Schaette; David McAlpine
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2011-09-21       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 4.  Translational issues in cochlear synaptopathy.

Authors:  Ann E Hickox; Erik Larsen; Michael G Heinz; Leslie Shinobu; Jonathon P Whitton
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2017-01-07       Impact factor: 3.208

5.  Primary neural degeneration in the Guinea pig cochlea after reversible noise-induced threshold shift.

Authors:  Harrison W Lin; Adam C Furman; Sharon G Kujawa; M Charles Liberman
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2011-06-18

6.  Auditory function in normal-hearing, noise-exposed human ears.

Authors:  Greta C Stamper; Tiffany A Johnson
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2015 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.570

Review 7.  The clinical utility of distortion-product otoacoustic emissions.

Authors:  B L Lonsbury-Martin; G K Martin
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  1990-04       Impact factor: 3.570

8.  Evaluation of tinnitus patients with normal hearing sensitivity using TEOAEs and TEN test.

Authors:  Elsaeid Mohamed Thabet
Journal:  Auris Nasus Larynx       Date:  2009-03-13       Impact factor: 1.863

9.  Are inner or outer hair cells the source of summating potentials recorded from the round window?

Authors:  J D Durrant; J Wang; D L Ding; R J Salvi
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 1.840

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
  23 in total

1.  Electrophysiological markers of cochlear function correlate with hearing-in-noise performance among audiometrically normal subjects.

Authors:  Kelsie J Grant; Anita M Mepani; Peizhe Wu; Kenneth E Hancock; Victor de Gruttola; M Charles Liberman; Stéphane F Maison
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2020-07-08       Impact factor: 2.714

Review 2.  Toward the Future of Early Intervention for Adult Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Carole E Johnson; Christi M Barbee; Jeffrey L Danhauer; Anna Marie Jilla; Suzanne H Kimball; Katie L Seever
Journal:  Semin Hear       Date:  2018-06-15

3.  Reliability of Measures Intended to Assess Threshold-Independent Hearing Disorders.

Authors:  Aryn M Kamerer; Judy G Kopun; Sara E Fultz; Stephen T Neely; Daniel M Rasetshwane
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2019 Nov/Dec       Impact factor: 3.570

4.  Examining physiological and perceptual consequences of noise exposure.

Authors:  Aryn M Kamerer; Judy G Kopun; Sara E Fultz; Carissa Allen; Stephen T Neely; Daniel M Rasetshwane
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  The Role of Cognition in Common Measures of Peripheral Synaptopathy and Hidden Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Aryn M Kamerer; Angela AuBuchon; Sara E Fultz; Judy G Kopun; Stephen T Neely; Daniel M Rasetshwane
Journal:  Am J Audiol       Date:  2019-10-24       Impact factor: 1.493

6.  A model of auditory brainstem response wave I morphology.

Authors:  Aryn M Kamerer; Stephen T Neely; Daniel M Rasetshwane
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2020-01       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  A simple algorithm for objective threshold determination of auditory brainstem responses.

Authors:  Kirupa Suthakar; M Charles Liberman
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2019-08-08       Impact factor: 3.208

8.  Middle Ear Muscle Reflex and Word Recognition in "Normal-Hearing" Adults: Evidence for Cochlear Synaptopathy?

Authors:  Anita M Mepani; Sarah A Kirk; Kenneth E Hancock; Kara Bennett; Victor de Gruttola; M Charles Liberman; Stéphane F Maison
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2020 Jan/Feb       Impact factor: 3.570

Review 9.  Hidden Hearing Loss: A Disorder with Multiple Etiologies and Mechanisms.

Authors:  David C Kohrman; Guoqiang Wan; Luis Cassinotti; Gabriel Corfas
Journal:  Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med       Date:  2020-01-02       Impact factor: 6.915

10.  Hidden hearing loss is associated with loss of ribbon synapses of cochlea inner hair cells.

Authors:  Feng Song; Bin Gan; Na Wang; Zhe Wang; An-Ting Xu
Journal:  Biosci Rep       Date:  2021-04-30       Impact factor: 3.840

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.