Literature DB >> 33664649

Correlation and Reliability of Behavioral and Otoacoustic-Emission Estimates of Contralateral Medial Olivocochlear Reflex Strength in Humans.

Miriam I Marrufo-Pérez1,2, Peter T Johannesen1,2, Enrique A Lopez-Poveda1,2,3.   

Abstract

The roles of the medial olivocochlear reflex (MOCR) in human hearing have been widely investigated but remain controversial. We reason that this may be because the effects of MOCR activation on cochlear mechanical responses can be assessed only indirectly in healthy humans, and the different methods used to assess those effects possibly yield different and/or unreliable estimates. One aim of this study was to investigate the correlation between three methods often employed to assess the strength of MOCR activation by contralateral acoustic stimulation (CAS). We measured tone detection thresholds (N = 28), click-evoked otoacoustic emission (CEOAE) input/output (I/O) curves (N = 18), and distortion-product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) I/O curves (N = 18) for various test frequencies in the presence and the absence of CAS (broadband noise of 60 dB SPL). As expected, CAS worsened tone detection thresholds, suppressed CEOAEs and DPOAEs, and horizontally shifted CEOAE and DPOAE I/O curves to higher levels. However, the CAS effect on tone detection thresholds was not correlated with the horizontal shift of CEOAE or DPOAE I/O curves, and the CAS-induced CEOAE suppression was not correlated with DPOAE suppression. Only the horizontal shifts of CEOAE and DPOAE I/O functions were correlated with each other at 1.5, 2, and 3 kHz. A second aim was to investigate which of the methods is more reliable. The test-retest variability of the CAS effect was high overall but smallest for tone detection thresholds and CEOAEs, suggesting that their use should be prioritized over the use of DPOAEs. Many factors not related with the MOCR, including the limited parametric space studied, the low resolution of the I/O curves, and the reduced numbers of observations due to data exclusion likely contributed to the weak correlations and the large test-retest variability noted. These findings can help us understand the inconsistencies among past studies and improve our understanding of the functional significance of the MOCR.
Copyright © 2021 Marrufo-Pérez, Johannesen and Lopez-Poveda.

Entities:  

Keywords:  basilar membrane; contralateral acoustic stimulation; effective attenuation; input/output curves; olivocochlear efferents; suppression

Year:  2021        PMID: 33664649      PMCID: PMC7921326          DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2021.640127

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Front Neurosci        ISSN: 1662-453X            Impact factor:   4.677


  97 in total

1.  Activation of medial olivocochlear efferent system in humans: influence of stimulus bandwidth.

Authors:  S Maison; C Micheyl; G Andéol; S Gallégo; L Collet
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 3.208

2.  Sources of distortion product otoacoustic emissions revealed by suppression experiments and inverse fast Fourier transforms in normal ears.

Authors:  D Konrad-Martin; S T Neely; D H Keefe; P A Dorn; M P Gorga
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 3.  Efferent-mediated control of basilar membrane motion.

Authors:  N P Cooper; J J Guinan
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2006-08-10       Impact factor: 5.182

4.  Considering distortion product otoacoustic emission fine structure in measurements of the medial olivocochlear reflex.

Authors:  Carolina Abdala; Srikanta K Mishra; Tracy L Williams
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Medial olivocochlear functioning and speech perception in noise in older adults.

Authors:  Siti Zamratol-Mai Sarah Mukari; Wan Hasyimah Wan Mamat
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2008-05-05       Impact factor: 1.854

6.  Contralateral acoustic stimulation alters the magnitude and phase of distortion product otoacoustic emissions.

Authors:  Ryan Deeter; Rebekah Abel; Lauren Calandruccio; Sumitrajit Dhar
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Visual speech gestures modulate efferent auditory system.

Authors:  Aravind Kumar Namasivayam; Wing Yiu Stephanie Wong; Dinaay Sharma; Pascal van Lieshout
Journal:  J Integr Neurosci       Date:  2015-01-19       Impact factor: 2.117

8.  Transiently evoked otoacoustic emission amplitudes change with changes of directed attention.

Authors:  P Froehlich; L Collet; A Morgon
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  1993-04

9.  Conditioning-related protection from acoustic injury: effects of chronic deefferentation and sham surgery.

Authors:  S G Kujawa; M C Liberman
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 2.714

10.  Contralateral auditory stimulation alters acoustic distortion products in humans.

Authors:  A Moulin; L Collet; R Duclaux
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1993-02       Impact factor: 3.208

View more
  2 in total

1.  Understanding degraded speech leads to perceptual gating of a brainstem reflex in human listeners.

Authors:  Heivet Hernández-Pérez; Jason Mikiel-Hunter; David McAlpine; Sumitrajit Dhar; Sriram Boothalingam; Jessica J M Monaghan; Catherine M McMahon
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2021-10-20       Impact factor: 8.029

Review 2.  The role of the medial olivocochlear reflex in psychophysical masking and intensity resolution in humans: a review.

Authors:  Skyler G Jennings
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2021-04-28       Impact factor: 2.974

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.