Comparison of ASSR and frequency specificity ABR induced by NB CE-Chirp for prediction of behavioral hearing thresholds in children with conductive hearing loss

Abstract

BackgroundElectrophysiological tests are often used to evaluate hearing loss in infants and young children with conductive hearing loss, no matter to quantify or characterize. However, there are advantages and disadvantages associated with the various electrophysiological tests that are currently available. Therefore, there is no gold standard test. This study aimed to compare the value of narrow-band (NB) CE-Chirp-induced auditory steady-state response (ASSR) and auditory brainstem response (ABR) for assessing hearing thresholds in children with conductive hearing loss. We hope to identify an effective electrophysiological testing method to evaluate conductive hearing loss and provide a reference for clinical hearing assessment of infants with conductive hearing loss. Subjectsand Methods: We selected 27 children (41 ears) aged 3–6 years with otitis media with effusion (OME). Within 1 day, they underwent behavioral audiometry and NB CE-Chirp-induced ASSR and ABR tests in sequence. Pearson's correlation analysis was performed to compare behavioral audiometry thresholds and ASSR and ABR response thresholds at 500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz. ResultsThe behavioral audiometry thresholds of all children were strongly correlated with the response thresholds of the two electrophysiological tests, with correlation coefficients of 0.659, 0.605, 0.723, and 0.857 for ASSR, and 0.587, 0.684, 0.753, and 0.802 for ABR. The proportion of children with a difference of ≤10 dB between ASSR and behavioral audiometry thresholds or between ABR and behavioral audiometry thresholds was not high, especially in the low frequencies. ABR results were superior to ASSR results in terms of predicting actual hearing levels. At 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz, the average differences between the behavioral hearing thresholds and ASSR thresholds in the 41 ears were 5.6, 5.7, 2, and 5.6 dB, respectively. The average differences between behavioral hearing thresholds and ABR thresholds was −5.6, −1.4, −6.8, and 3.2 dB, respectively. The hearing loss configuration of the ASSR exhibited a peaked pattern, similar to behavioral audiometry, whereas the ABR exhibited an ascending pattern. The time to perform the single-ear ASSR test was 5.9 min, whereas the ABR test took 17.0 min. ConclusionASSR and ABR induced by the NB CE-Chirp correlated well with behavioral audiometry in children with conductive hearing loss. The NB CE-Chirp ASSR has advantages in terms of testing time and hearing configuration evaluation, whereas ABR has better reliability than ASSR. However, the stability of ASSR and ABR induced by the NB CE-Chirp is poor, and the thresholds obtained cannot replace behavioral audiometry in evaluating the true hearing of children with conductive hearing loss. However, ASSR and ABR can be used as auxiliary tests for cross-validation.