Abstract
Os potenciais evocados auditivos de longa latência (PEALLs) se referem a uma série de mudanças elétricas, ocorridas no sistema nervoso central, resultante da estimulação da via sensorial auditiva. Muitos estudos abordam o uso destes potenciais, controlando o artefato gerado pelo movimento ocular com a utilização de equipamentos com grande número de canais. Porém, na prática clínica nacional, a realidade é diferente, havendo disponibilidade de equipamentos com número reduzido de canais. OBJETIVO: Comparar dois métodos de controle do artefato gerado pelo movimento ocular durante a captação dos PEALLs usando dois canais de registro. MATERIAL E MÉTODO: Estudo prospectivo pela aplicação de dois métodos de captação dos PEALLs (subtração do artefato ocular e controle do limite de rejeição) em 10 adultos ouvintes normais. RESULTADOS: Não foi observada diferença estatisticamente significante entre os valores de latência obtidos com o uso dos dois métodos, apenas entre os valores de amplitude. CONCLUSÃO: Os dois métodos foram eficientes para a captação dos PEALLs e para o controle do artefato do movimento ocular. O método do controle do limite de rejeição promoveu maiores valores de amplitude.
Highlights
Many systems generate long-latency auditory evoked potentials (LLAEPs), in particular the thalamocortical and corticocortical auditory pathways, the primary auditory cortex, and associative cortical areas.[1]
Two Brazilian studies have applied LLAEPs testing in their methods to characterize the maturation of the auditory system;[2,3] these studies showed that maturation is reflected in age-related amplitude and latency variations of P1, N1 and P2
In Brazil, fully using the methods presented in the international literature is not feasible, because many recording channels are used for controlling ocular artifacts, and in most cases the devices available in this country have only two recording channels
Summary
Many systems generate long-latency auditory evoked potentials (LLAEPs), in particular the thalamocortical and corticocortical auditory pathways, the primary auditory cortex, and associative cortical areas.[1]. There are many internationally published papers dealing with this issue;[5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27] in the Brazilian medical literature, there is only one paper on this topic.[3] The arrangement of electrodes is one of the variables to be taken into account for recording ocular movement; the supra- and infraorbital positions are preferred.[3,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14] other studies have suggested using jointly the electrodes placed on the external end of the eyes.[11,12,13,14] Other techniques include automatically controlling the artifact, which consists of automatically excluding auditory potentials recorded during ocular movement,[6,13,15,16,17,18] eye fixation as a method for minimizing ocular movement,[8,19] and rejecting those recordings with amplitudes that encompass ocular movement;[5,20,21] no detailed explanation, is given as to how these techniques are done. The purpose of this study was to compare two ocular artifact-controlling methods when recording LLAEPs based on the recording system of potentials from two channels
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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 call
