Changes in click characteristics during ABR recording.

UNLABELLED: Manipulation of auditory stimuli affect the ABR evoked potentials and aid the diagnosis, particularly in auditory neuropathy patients. Some patients with auditory neuropathy lose evoked otoacoustic emissions over time; in these cases, comparing responses to rarefaction and condensation clicks, and decreasing the stimulus rate can show an extended cochlear microphonism or yield an improved electric potential record. AIM: To analyze the effect of these click manipulations on the records of potentials of patients with hearing loss as a form of improving the diagnosis. STUDY DESIGN: A clinical prospective study. PATIENTS AND METHOD: 59 patients with hearing loss underwent ABR recording using rarefaction and condensation clicks at a stimulus rate of 27.7/sec, and rarefaction clicks at a stimulus rate of 3.3/sec. The records were compared to the otoacoustic evoked emission. RESULTS: Eight (13.53%) patients showed changes in the recorded ABR potentials as a result of manipulating the characteristics of clicks, such as extended cochlear microphonism or an improved record of electric potentials. Five patients had no otoacoustic evoked emissions. CONCLUSION: Manipulation of click stimuli can improve the topographic diagnosis of hearing loss, particularly in the group of auditory neuropathy patients with no otoacoustic evoked emissions, where usually, the diagnosis is only possible through the method described above.

Mudanças nos parâmetros do clique durante a captação do BERA / Changes in click characteristics during ABR recording

Mudanças no estímulo auditivo afetam os potenciais evocados do BERA e ajudam no diagnóstico, principalmente em indivíduos com neuropatia auditiva. Alguns pacientes com neuropatia auditiva perdem as emissões otoacústicas evocadas e, nestes casos, a comparação das respostas obtidas com cliques rarefeitos e condensados e a redução da freqüência de apresentação deste clique podem mostrar um microfonismo coclear alargado ou uma melhor captação do potencial elétrico. OBJETIVO: Analisar o efeito destas mudanças sobre os potenciais captados em pacientes com deficiência auditiva, como forma de melhorar o diagnóstico. FORMA DO ESTUDO: Clínico prospectivo. MATERIAL E MÉTODO: 59 pacientes com deficiência auditiva foram submetidos à captação do BERA usando cliques rarefeitos e condensados apresentados a uma freqüência de 27,7/seg. e cliques rarefeitos apresentados a uma freqüência de 3,3/seg. Os resultados foram comparados com as emissões otoacústicas evocadas. RESULTADOS: Oito (13,53 por cento) pacientes apresentaram alterações nos resultados do BERA com as mudanças nas características do clique, como microfonismo coclear alargado, ou uma melhora no traçado. Cinco não apresentavam emissões otoacústicas evocadas. CONCLUSÃO: Mudanças nas características do clique podem melhorar o diagnóstico topográfico de perda auditiva, principalmente no grupo de indivíduos com neuropatia auditiva e ausência de emissões otoacústicas, onde muitas vezes somente desta forma é possível o diagnóstico.

Manipulation of auditory stimuli affect the ABR evoked potentials and aid the diagnosis, particularly in auditory neuropathy patients. Some patients with auditory neuropathy lose evoked otoacoustic emissions over time; in these cases, comparing responses to rarefaction and condensation clicks, and decreasing the stimulus rate can show an extended cochlear microphonism or yield an improved electric potential record. AIM: To analyze the effect of these click manipulations on the records of potentials of patients with hearing loss as a form of improving the diagnosis. STUDY DESIGN: A clinical prospective study. PATIENTS AND METHOD: 59 patients with hearing loss underwent ABR recording using rarefaction and condensation clicks at a stimulus rate of 27.7/sec, and rarefaction clicks at a stimulus rate of 3.3/sec. The records were compared to the otoacoustic evoked emission. RESULTS: Eight (13.53 percent) patients showed changes in the recorded ABR potentials as a result of manipulating the characteristics of clicks, such as extended cochlear microphonism or an improved record of electric potentials. Five patients had no otoacoustic evoked emissions. CONCLUSION: Manipulation of click stimuli can improve the topographic diagnosis of hearing loss, particularly in the group of auditory neuropathy patients with no otoacoustic evoked emissions, where usually, the diagnosis is only possible through the method described above.