Literature DB >> 32639924

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

Kelsie J Grant1, Anita M Mepani1, Peizhe Wu1,2, Kenneth E Hancock1,2, Victor de Gruttola3, M Charles Liberman1,2,4, Stéphane F Maison1,2,4.   

Abstract

Hearing loss caused by noise exposure, ototoxic drugs, or aging results from the loss of sensory cells, as reflected in audiometric threshold elevation. Animal studies show that loss of hair cells can be preceded by loss of auditory-nerve peripheral synapses, which likely degrades auditory processing. While this condition, known as cochlear synaptopathy, can be diagnosed in mice by a reduction of suprathreshold cochlear neural responses, its diagnosis in humans remains challenging. To look for evidence of cochlear nerve damage in normal hearing subjects, we measured their word recognition performance in difficult listening environments and compared it to cochlear function as assessed by otoacoustic emissions and click-evoked electrocochleography. Several electrocochleographic markers were correlated with word scores, whereas distortion product otoacoustic emissions were not. Specifically, the summating potential (SP) was larger and the cochlear nerve action potential (AP) was smaller in those with the worst word scores. Adding a forward masker or increasing stimulus rate reduced SP in the worst performers, suggesting that this potential includes postsynaptic components as well as hair cell receptor potentials. Results suggests that some of the variance in word scores among listeners with normal audiometric threshold arises from cochlear neural damage.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Recent animal studies suggest that millions of people may be at risk of permanent impairment from cochlear synaptopathy, the age-related and noise-induced degeneration of neural connections in the inner ear that "hides" behind a normal audiogram. This study examines electrophysiological responses to clicks in a large cohort of subjects with normal hearing sensitivity. The resultant correlations with word recognition performance are consistent with an important contribution cochlear neural damage to deficits in hearing in noise abilities.

Entities:  

Keywords:  auditory brain stem responses; auditory nerve; cochlea; cochlear synaptopathy; electrocochleography; hair cell; hearing in noise; hidden hearing loss

Year:  2020        PMID: 32639924      PMCID: PMC7500376          DOI: 10.1152/jn.00016.2020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurophysiol        ISSN: 0022-3077            Impact factor:   2.714


  68 in total

1.  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

2.  Effects of sex on auditory brainstem responses in infancy and early childhood.

Authors:  M Maurizi; F Ottaviani; G Paludetti; G Almadori; F Pierri; M Rosignoli
Journal:  Scand Audiol       Date:  1988

3.  Gender differences in cochlear response time: an explanation for gender amplitude differences in the unmasked auditory brain-stem response.

Authors:  M Don; C W Ponton; J J Eggermont; A Masuda
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Department of Veterans Affairs compact disc recording for auditory perceptual assessment: background and introduction.

Authors:  D Noffsinger; R H Wilson; F E Musiek
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  1994-07       Impact factor: 1.664

5.  Brainstem auditory-evoked responses. Normal variation as a function of stimulus and subject characteristics.

Authors:  J E Stockard; J J Stockard; B F Westmoreland; J L Corfits
Journal:  Arch Neurol       Date:  1979-12

6.  Neural and receptor cochlear potentials obtained by transtympanic electrocochleography in auditory neuropathy.

Authors:  Rosamaria Santarelli; Arnold Starr; Henry J Michalewski; Edoardo Arslan
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2008-03-20       Impact factor: 3.708

Review 7.  Acoustic injury and the physiology of hearing.

Authors:  R A Schmiedt
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1984-11       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Noise History and Auditory Function in Young Adults With and Without Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus.

Authors:  Christopher Spankovich; Colleen G Le Prell; Edward Lobarinas; Linda J Hood
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2017 Nov/Dec       Impact factor: 3.570

Review 9.  Effects of Recreational Noise on Threshold and Suprathreshold Measures of Auditory Function.

Authors:  Angela N C Fulbright; Colleen G Le Prell; Scott K Griffiths; Edward Lobarinas
Journal:  Semin Hear       Date:  2017-10-10

10.  Impaired speech perception in noise with a normal audiogram: No evidence for cochlear synaptopathy and no relation to lifetime noise exposure.

Authors:  Hannah Guest; Kevin J Munro; Garreth Prendergast; Rebecca E Millman; Christopher J Plack
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2018-03-09       Impact factor: 3.208

View more
  20 in total

1.  Modeling the effects of age and hearing loss on concurrent vowel scores.

Authors:  Harshavardhan Settibhaktini; Michael G Heinz; Ananthakrishna Chintanpalli
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2021-11       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Optimizing non-invasive functional markers for cochlear deafferentation based on electrocochleography and auditory brainstem responses.

Authors:  Kelly C Harris; Jianxin Bao
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2022-04       Impact factor: 2.482

3.  Predicting neural deficits in sensorineural hearing loss from word recognition scores.

Authors:  Kelsie J Grant; Aravindakshan Parthasarathy; Viacheslav Vasilkov; Benjamin Caswell-Midwinter; Maria E Freitas; Victor de Gruttola; Daniel B Polley; M Charles Liberman; Stéphane F Maison
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-06-23       Impact factor: 4.996

4.  Neural Contributions to the Cochlear Summating Potential: Spiking and Dendritic Components.

Authors:  Brendan T Lutz; Kendall A Hutson; Eleonora M C Trecca; Meredith Hamby; Douglas C Fitzpatrick
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2022-03-07

5.  Evidence for Loss of Activity in Low-Spontaneous-Rate Auditory Nerve Fibers of Older Adults.

Authors:  Carolyn M McClaskey; James W Dias; Richard A Schmiedt; Judy R Dubno; Kelly C Harris
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2022-01-12

6.  Envelope following responses predict speech-in-noise performance in normal-hearing listeners.

Authors:  Anita M Mepani; Sarah Verhulst; Kenneth E Hancock; Markus Garrett; Viacheslav Vasilkov; Kara Bennett; Victor de Gruttola; M Charles Liberman; Stéphane F Maison
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2021-03-03       Impact factor: 2.714

7.  The search for correlates of age-related cochlear synaptopathy: Measures of temporal envelope processing and spatial release from speech-on-speech masking.

Authors:  Chhayakanta Patro; Heather A Kreft; Magdalena Wojtczak
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2021-08-12       Impact factor: 3.672

8.  Predicting synapse counts in living humans by combining computational models with auditory physiology.

Authors:  Brad N Buran; Garnett P McMillan; Sarineh Keshishzadeh; Sarah Verhulst; Naomi F Bramhall
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2022-01       Impact factor: 2.482

9.  Cochlear neural degeneration disrupts hearing in background noise by increasing auditory cortex internal noise.

Authors:  Jennifer Resnik; Daniel B Polley
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2021-02-08       Impact factor: 17.173

10.  Reducing Auditory Nerve Excitability by Acute Antagonism of Ca2+-Permeable AMPA Receptors.

Authors:  Amit Walia; Choongheon Lee; Jared Hartsock; Shawn S Goodman; Roland Dolle; Alec N Salt; Jeffery T Lichtenhan; Mark A Rutherford
Journal:  Front Synaptic Neurosci       Date:  2021-07-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.