1990OtolaryngologyRequires access

Canal Electrode Electrocochleography in Patients with Absent Wave | ABRs

Frank E. Musiek, Jane A. Baran

Open publisher page 5 citations

Abstract

Fifteen patients (23 ears) who demonstrated no recordable wave I at the time of clinical auditory brainstem response testing were subsequently retested under three auditory brainstem response-electrocochleography conditions. One condition was the traditional auditory brainstem response, another was the auditory brainstem response with electrocochleography filtering, and the third was an electrocochleographic condition using a canal electrode (Tiptrode). The electrocochleographic recording condition provided more readable wave I responses than the other conditions. In addition, the electrocochleographic condition provided wave I amplitudes that were greater than those of the traditional auditory brainstem response. The later waves of the auditory brainstem response (III and V) were similar in wave presence amplitudes and latencies for all three test conditions.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Fifteen patients (23 ears) who demonstrated no recordable wave I at the time of clinical auditory brainstem response testing were subsequently retested under three auditory brainstem response-electrocochleography conditions. One condition was the traditional auditory brainstem response, another was the auditory brainstem response with electrocochleography filtering, and the third was an electrocochleographic condition using a canal electrode (Tiptrode). The electrocochleographic recording condition provided more readable wave I responses than the other conditions. In addition, the electrocochleographic condition provided wave I amplitudes that were greater than those of the traditional auditory brainstem response. The later waves of the auditory brainstem response (III and V) were similar in wave presence amplitudes and latencies for all three test conditions.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 5 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Fifteen patients (23 ears) who demonstrated no recordable wave I at the time of clinical auditory brainstem response testing were subsequently retested under three auditory brainstem response-electrocochleography conditions. One condition was the traditional auditory brainstem response, another was the auditory brainstem response with electrocochleography filtering, and the third was an electrocochleographic condition using a canal electrode (Tiptrode). The electrocochleographic recording condition provided more readable wave I responses than the other conditions. In addition, the electrocochleographic condition provided wave I amplitudes that were greater than those of the traditional auditory brainstem response. The later waves of the auditory brainstem response (III and V) were similar in wave presence amplitudes and latencies for all three test conditions.

Key concepts: Electrocochleography, Audiology, Brainstem, Auditory brainstem response, Medicine, Ear canal, Acoustics, Hearing loss

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Canal Electrode Electrocochleography in Patients with Absent Wave | ABRs — Research Paper | ScholarLens