Current Issue
Volumes and Issues
For Authors
Manuscript Guidelines
Review Process
Conflict of Interest
Copyright
About the Journal
Editorial Board
Aim and Scope
Policy and Ethical Guidelines
Promotion of the Journal
Print-Version Subscription
Publisher and Contact Information
Contact Information
Sign in
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
IMPROVEMENT IN PERFORMANCE OF THE CENTRAL AUDITORY SYSTEM IN TYPE 1 NEUROFIBROMATOSIS AFTER FORMAL AUDIOTORY TRAINING
1
Speech Therapy Department, Federal University of São Paulo, Brazil
2
Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Support Group for Adolescents and Children with Cancer, Federal University of São Paulo, Brazil
A - Research concept and design; B - Collection and/or assembly of data; C - Data analysis and interpretation; D - Writing the article; E - Critical revision of the article; F - Final approval of article;
Submission date: 2022-03-14
Final revision date: 2022-07-25
Acceptance date: 2022-08-01
Publication date: 2022-09-30
Corresponding author
Raquel Caroline Ferreira Lopes Fontanelli
Speech Therapy Department, Federal University of São Paulo, Rua Botucatu, 802, 04023-062, São Paulo, Brazil
Speech Therapy Department, Federal University of São Paulo, Rua Botucatu, 802, 04023-062, São Paulo, Brazil
J Hear Sci 2022;12(3):22-32
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Background:
The aim was to electrophysiologically evaluate changes in the peripheral and central auditory systems in individuals with neurofibromatosis type 1 who underwent formal auditory training.
Material and methods:
The sample consisted of 6 individuals aged between 9 and 15 years. The procedures involved anamnesis, meatoscopy, brainstem auditory potentials and long-latency evoked potentials, and behavioral tests of central auditory processing. All individuals were given 9 weekly sessions of formal auditory training.
Results:
After therapeutic intervention we observed improved performance in auditory closure (p = 0.014) and figure–background discrimination for verbal sounds (p = 0.025). There were no significant changes in brainstem auditory evoked potentials. However, the P300 of the longlatency auditory evoked potential showed significant differences for the left ear in terms of latencies of waves N2 (p = 0.05) and P3 (p = 0.05) and the amplitude of N2–P3 (p = 0.05).
Conclusions:
Therapeutic intervention by means of formal auditory training is effective in rehabilitating central auditory processing disorder. There were improved responses in both behavioral and electrophysiological assessments, which were maintained for at least 4 months.
The aim was to electrophysiologically evaluate changes in the peripheral and central auditory systems in individuals with neurofibromatosis type 1 who underwent formal auditory training.
Material and methods:
The sample consisted of 6 individuals aged between 9 and 15 years. The procedures involved anamnesis, meatoscopy, brainstem auditory potentials and long-latency evoked potentials, and behavioral tests of central auditory processing. All individuals were given 9 weekly sessions of formal auditory training.
Results:
After therapeutic intervention we observed improved performance in auditory closure (p = 0.014) and figure–background discrimination for verbal sounds (p = 0.025). There were no significant changes in brainstem auditory evoked potentials. However, the P300 of the longlatency auditory evoked potential showed significant differences for the left ear in terms of latencies of waves N2 (p = 0.05) and P3 (p = 0.05) and the amplitude of N2–P3 (p = 0.05).
Conclusions:
Therapeutic intervention by means of formal auditory training is effective in rehabilitating central auditory processing disorder. There were improved responses in both behavioral and electrophysiological assessments, which were maintained for at least 4 months.
REFERENCES (68)
1.
Anderson JL, Gutmann DH. Neurofibromatosis type 1. In: Islam MP, Roach ES, editors. Handbook of Clinical Neurology. Vol. 132, 3rd series. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2015.
2.
Viskochil D. Genetics of neurofibromatosis 1 and the NF1 gene. J Child Neurol, 2002; 17(8): 562–70.
3.
Salamon J, Mautner VF, Adam G, Derlin T. Multimodal imaging in neurofibromatosis type 1 associated nerve sheath tumors. Fortschr Röntgenstr, 2015; 187: 1084–92.
4.
Kluwe L, Nguyen R, Vogt J, Bengesser K, Mussotter T, Friedrich RE et al. Internal tumor burden in neurofibromatosis type 1 patients with large NF1 deletions. Genes Chromosomes Cancer, 2012; 51: 447–51.
5.
Ducatman BS, Scheithauer BW, Piepgras DG, Reiman HM, Ilstrup DM. Malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors. A clinicopathologic study of 120 cases. Cancer, 1986; 57(10): 2006–21.
6.
Pensak ML, Keith RW, Dignan PS, Stowens DW, Towbin RB, Katbamna B. Neuroaudiologic abnormalities in patients with type 1 neurofibromatosis. Laryngoscope, 1989; 99(7 Pt 1): 702–6.
7.
Hyman SL, Shores A, North KN. The nature and frequency of cognitive deficits in children with neurofibromatosis type 1. Neurology, 2005; 65(7): 1037–44.
8.
Barcelos-Corse LFD. Audiologic phenotype in individuals with neurofibromatosis type 1 [thesis]. Towson University; 2013.
9.
White AK, Smith RJH, Bigler CR, Brooke WF, Schauer PR. Head and neck manifestation of neurofibromatosis. Laryngoscope, 1986; 96: 732–7.
10.
Lustig LR, Jackler RK. Neurofibromatosis type I involving the external auditory canal. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 1996; 114(2): 299–307.
11.
Batista PB, Silva CM, Valentim HO, Rodrigues LOC, Rezende NA. Avaliação do processamento auditivo na neurofibromatose tipo 1. Rev Soc Bras Fonoaudiol, 2010; 15(4): 604–8.
12.
Batista PB. Avaliação do processamento auditivo e da linguagem em pacientes com neurofibromatose tipo 1 [thesis]. Belo Horizonte: Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais; 2011.
13.
Batista PB, Lemos SMA, Rodrigues LOC, Rezende NA. Auditory temporal processing deficit and language disorders in patients with neurofibromatosis type 1. J Commun Disord, 2014; 48: 18–26.
14.
Batista PB, Bertollo EMG, Costa DS, Eliam L, Cunha KSG, Cunha-Melo JR, et al. Neurofibromatosis: part 2 – clinical management. Arq Neuropsiquiatr, 2015; 73(6): 531–43.
15.
Batista PB. Treinamento auditivo acusticamente controlado em pacientes com neurofibromatose tipo 1 [thesis]. Belo Horizonte: Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais; 2016.
16.
Pride NA, Payne JM, North KN. The Impact of ADHD on the cognitive and academic functioning of children with NF1. Devel Neuropsych, 2012; 37(7): 590–600.
17.
Payne JM, Arnold SS, Pride NA, North KN. Does attention-deficit-hyperactivity disorder exacerbate executive dysfunction in children with neurofibromatosis type 1? Devel Med Child Neurol, 2012; 54(10): 898–904.
18.
Payne JM, Pickering T, Porter M, Oates EC, Walia N, Prelog K, North KN. Longitudinal assessment of cognition and T2-hyperintensities in NF1: an 18-year study. Am J Med Genet A, 2014; 164A: 661–5.
19.
Musiek FE, Chermak, G. Testing and treating (C)APD in head injury patients. Hear J, 2008; 61(6): 36–8.
20.
Sousa LCA, Piza MRT, Alvarenga KF, Cóser PL. Eletrofisiologia da audição e emissões otoacústicas: princípios e aplicações clínicas. Ribeirão Preto: Editora Novo Conceito; 2010, 49–130.
21.
Matas CG, Magliaro FCL. Introdução aos potenciais evocados auditivos e potencial evocado auditivo de tronco encefálico. In: Bevilacqua MC, Martinez MAN, Balen AS, Pupo AC, Reis ACMB, Frota S. Tratado de Audiologia. São Paulo: Ed. Santos; 2011, 180–95.
22.
Reis ACMB, Frizzo ACF. Potencial evocado auditivo de longa latência. In: Bevilacqua MC, Martinez MAN, Balen AS, Pupo AC, Reis ACMB, Frota S. Tratado de Audiologia. São Paulo: Ed. Santos; 2011, 231–60.
23.
Frizzo ACF, Advíncula KP. Potenciais evocados auditivos de longa latência: conceitos e aplicações. In: Menezes PL, Andrade KCL, Frizzo ACF, Carnaúba ATL, Lins OG. Tratado de Eletrofisiologia para a Audiologia. Ribeirão Preto, SP: Book Toy; 2018, 139–50.
24.
Bluschke A, von der Hagen M, Papenhagen K, Roessner V, Beste C. Conflict processing in juvenile patients with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) and healthy controls: two pathways to success. Neuroimage Clin, 2017; 14: 499–505.
25.
Hochman B, Nahas FX, Oliveira Filho RS, Ferreira LM. Desenhos de pesquisa. Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira, 2005; 20 (Suppl 2): 2–9.
26.
Auditec. Evaluation manual of pitch pattern sequence and duration pattern sequence. Missouri: Auditec of St. Louis; 1997.
27.
Pereira LD, Schochat L. Testes auditivos comportamentais para avaliação do processamento auditivo central. Barueri, SP: Pró Fono; 2011.
28.
Costa MJ. Listas de sentenças em português: apresentação e estratégias de aplicação na audiologia. Santa Maria, RS: Pallotti; 1998, 44.
29.
Schettini RC, Rocha TCM, Almeida ZLDM. Exercícios para o desenvolvimento de habillidades do processamento auditivo. 3a ed. Ribeirão Preto, SP: Book Toy; 2011.
30.
Hood L. The normal auditory brainstem response. In: Hood L. Clinical Applications of the Auditory Brainstem Response. San Diego: Singular; 1998, 126–44.
31.
Hall JW. eHandbook of Auditory Evoked Responses: Principles, procedures & protocols. St. Augustine, FL: Pearson Education; 2015.
32.
McPherson DL. Long latency auditory evoked potentials. In: McPherson DL. Late Potentials of the Auditory System. San Diego: Singular; 1996, 7–21.
33.
Pereira LD, Schochat E. Processamento auditivo central: abordagem passo a passo. In: Pereira LD, Schochat E, editors. Processamento Auditivo Central: Manual de avaliação. São Paulo: Lovise; 1997, 49–60.
34.
Musiek FE, Shinn JMS, Hare CMA. Plasticity, auditory training and auditory processing disorders. Semin Hear, 2002; 23(4): 263–75.
35.
Dias KZ, Gil D. Treinamento auditivo acusticamente controlado nos distúrbios do processamento auditivo. In: Tratado de Audiologia, 2nd edition. Rio de Janeiro: Guanabara Koogan; 2015; 534–40.
36.
Friedman JM. Epidemiology of neurofibromatosis type 1. Am J Med Genetics, 1999; 89: 1–6.
37.
Souza JF, Toledo LL, Ferreira MCM, Rodrigues LOC, Rezende NA. Neurofibromatose tipo 1: mais comum e grave do que se imagina. Rev Assoc Med Bras, 2009; 55(4): 394–9.
38.
Pollack IF, Shultz B, Mulvihill JJ. The management of brainstem gliomas in patients with neurofibromatosis 1. Neurology, 1996; 46: 1652–60.
39.
Darrigo LG, Bonalumi Filho A, Alessandro DSMD, Geller M. Neurofibromatose tipo 1 na infância: revisão dos aspectos clínicos. Rev Paul Pediatr, 2008; 26(2): 176–82.
40.
Billingsley RL, Slopis JM, Swank PR, Jackson EF, Moore BD. Cortical morphology associated with language function in neurofibromatosis, type I. Brain Lang, 2003; 85(1): 125–39.
41.
Ruggieri M, Upadhyaya M, Di Rocco C, Gabriele A, Pascual-Castroviejo I. Neurofibromatosis type 1 and related disorders. In: Ruggieri M, Castroviejo IP, Di Rocco C. Neurocutaneous Disorders: Phakomatoses & Hamartoneoplastic Syndromes. Germany: Springer; 2008, 51–151.
42.
Lorenzo J, Barton B, Arnold SS, North KN. Cognitive features that distinguish preschool-age children with neurofibromatosis type 1 from their peers: a matched case – control study. J Pediatrics, 2013; 163(5): 1479–83.
43.
Rodrigues LOC, Batista PB, Goloni-Bertolo EM, de Souza-‑Costa D, Eliam L, Cunha KSG, et al. Neurofibromatoses. Part 1: Diagnosis and differential diagnosis. Arq Neuropsiquiatr, 2014; 72(3): 241–50.
44.
DeBella K, Szudek J, Friedman JM. Use of the National Institutes of Health criteria for diagnosis of neurofibromatosis 1 in children. Pediatrics, 2000; 105(3): 608–14.
45.
Remigereau C, Roy A, Costini O, Barbarot S, Bru M, Gall DL. Praxis skills and executive function in children with neurofibromatosis type 1. Appl Neuropsychol Child, 2018; 7(3): 224–34.
46.
Fontanelli RCFL, Fernandes NS, Silva GI, Aragão MM, Pinho RS, Gil D. Electrophysiological and electroacoustic assessment of hearing in individuals with neurofibromatosis type 1. J Hear Sci, 2021; 11(1): 46–53.
48.
Chermak GD, Bellis TJ, Musiek FE. Neurobiology cognitive science, and intervention. In: Chermak GD, Musiek FE, editors. Handbook of Central Auditory Processing Disorder (Vol. II, 2nd ed.). San Diego: Plural Publishing; 2013, 3–38.
49.
Cameron S, Dillon H. Remediation of spatial processing issues in Central Auditory Processing Disorder. In: Chermak GD, Musiek FE, editors. Handbook of Central Auditory Processing Disorder (Vol. II, 2nd ed.). San Diego: Plural Publishing; 2013, 201–24.
50.
Pazini E, Marques PM, D’Agostini AR, Bertuol B, Kessler TM, Garcia MV, Biaggio EPV. Treinamento auditivo computadorizado em uma adolescente portadora de neurofibromatose do tipo 2. Distúrb Comun, 2018; 30(3): 534–41.
51.
Musiek FE, Chermak GD, Weihing J. Auditory Training. In: Musiek FE, Chermak GD. Handbook of Central Auditory Processing Disorder, Plural Publishing, 2007.
52.
Engel AC, Bueno CD, Sleifer P. Treinamento musical e habilidades do processamento auditivo em crianças: revisão sistemática. Audiol Commun Res, 2019; 24: e2116.
53.
Melo Â, Mezzomo CL, Garcia MV, Biaggio EPV. Computerized auditory training in students: electrophysiological and subjective analysis of therapeutic effectiveness. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol, 2018; 22(1): 23–32.
54.
Teki S, Chait M, Kumar S, Shamma S, Griffiths TD. Segregation of complex acoustic scenes based on temporal coherence. eLife, 2013; 2(e00699): 1–16.
55.
Krishnan A, Gandour JT. Shaping brainstem representation of pitch-relevant information by language experience. In: Kraus N, Anderson S, White-Schwoch T, Fay RR, Popper AN. The Frequency Following Response A Window into Human Communication. Switzerland: Springer; 2017, 45–74.
56.
Hayes EA, Warrier CM, Nicol TG, Zecker SG, Kraus N. Neural plasticity following auditory training in children with learning problems. Clin Neurophysiol, 2003; 114(4): 673–84.
57.
Simões HO, Zanchetta S, Furtado EF. Métodos de treinamento auditivo em crianças com diagnóstico psiquiátrico: revisão integrativa da literatura. Rev CEFAC, 2020; 22(2): e18318.
58.
Musiek FE, Berge BE. How electrophysiologic tests of central auditory processing influence management. In: Bess F, editor. Children with Hearing Impairment: Contemporary trends. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt Bill Wilkerson Center Press; 1998, 145–62.
59.
Asal SI, Sobhy OA, Morsy HM. Effect of auditory temporal processing training on behavioral and electrophysiological functions in central presbycusis. Egypt J Otolaryngol, 2018; 34: 68–75.
60.
Kraus N, McGee T, Carrell T, King C, Littman T, Nicol T. Discrimination of speech-like contrasts in the auditory thalamus and cortex. J Acoust Soc Am, 1994; 96(5Pt.1): 2758–68.
62.
Murphy CFB, Filippini R, Palma D, Zalcman TE, Lima JP, Schochat E. Auditory training and cognitive functioning in adult with traumatic brain injury. Clinics, 2011; 66(4): 713–5.
63.
Harris DP, Hall JW. Feasibility of auditory event-related potential measurement in brain injury rehabilitation. J Am Aud Soc, 1990; 11(5): 340–50.
64.
American Academy of Audiology. Clinical Practice Guidelines: Diagnosis, Treatment and Management of Children and Adults with Central Auditory Processing Disorder. 2010. [cited 2020 July 21]. Available from: https: //www.audiology.org/publications-resources/document-library/central-auditory-processing-disorder.
65.
Elkholy MM, Ebraheim AM, El-Fayoumy NM. Brain responses to auditory oddball task in children with benign childhood epilepsy with centrotemporal spikes: quantitative analysis and correlation with neuropsychological assessment scores. Epilepsy Behav, 2018; 80: 272–9.
66.
Cota BCL, Fonseca JGM, Rodrigues LOC, Rezende NA, Batista PB, Riccardi VM et al. Amusia and its electrophysiological correlates in neurofibromatosis type 1. Arq Neuro-Psiquiatr, 2018; 76(5): 287–95.
67.
Cota BCL. Amusia como distúrbio auditivo central na Neurofibromatose tipo 1 [thesis]. Belo Horizonte: Minas Gerais, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Faculdade de Medicina, 2016.
68.
Lehtonen A, Howie E, Trump D, Huson SM. Behaviour in children with neurofibromatosis type 1: cognition, executive function, attention, emotion, and social competence. Devel Med Child Neurol, 2012; 55(2): 111–25.
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
