Abstract
Conclusions: Cochlear microphonics (CMs) play an important role in the diagnosis of auditory neuropathy (AN). It is necessary and helpful to diagnose the sites-of-lesion in infants and children with AN by analyzing the patterns of CM amplitudes and I/O functions together. Objectives: To investigate the characteristics and clinical significance of CMs in the diagnosis of AN among infants and children. Methods: A total of 36 infants and children (16 males and 20 females) were divided into two groups. Group A included 15 children (30 ears) with auditory brainstem response (ABR) absent and distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) present and group B included 21 children (30 ears) with ABR absent and DPOAEs absent. Fifteen normal-hearing infants (30 ears) made up the control group. Click eliciting CMs were recorded at stimulus levels of 100, 90, 80, and 70 dB nHL for each ear using a button electrode placed at the top of the forehead. A tube-clamping method was used to distinguish CMs from artifacts, and an averaging algorithm was used to obtain a clear CM waveform. The time delay and amplitude of CMs were measured in both children with AN and normal-hearing infants on (C–R)/2 waveforms, and an I/O function curve for each group was plotted with the stimulating level as input and the CM amplitude as output. Results: The largest identifiable CMs were generally found between 0.5 and 0.8 ms after stimulation with mean delay of 0.63 ± 0.04 ms in both group A and the control group, and 0.63 ± 0.07 ms in group B. There was no significant difference between the AN group and the control group in CM time delay. There was no significant difference (p > 0.05) between group A (AN with OAEs present, 0.47 ± 0.15 μV) and the control group (0.45 ± 0.13 μV) in CM amplitude, while CM amplitudes in children with AN with DPOAEs absent (0.24 ± 0.08 μV) were significantly lower than those in either the control group or group A (p < 0.01). The amplitude of CMs reduced with stimulus intensity in all the subjects. There was obvious nonlinearity in group A and the control group, while there was a more linear tendency in amplitude increasing on the I/O function curve in group B.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
