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 as an AUTHOR/REVIEWER
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
IPSILATERAL SUPPRESSION OF TRANSIENT EVOKED
OTOACOUSTIC EMISSIONS IN ADULTS
1
Division of Audiology, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane,
Australia
Publication date: 2016-09-30
Corresponding author
Joseph Kei
Joseph Kei, Division of Audiology, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia, e-mail: k.kei@uq.edu.au
Joseph Kei, Division of Audiology, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia, e-mail: k.kei@uq.edu.au
J Hear Sci 2016;6(3):25-35
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
Background:
Measurement of the medial olivocochlear (MOC) reflex provides useful clinical information for understanding the function of the auditory system. Although transient evoked otoacoustic emission (TEOAE) suppression has been demonstrated to be an indicator of MOC activity, its full role and fine details of TEOAE suppression spectra are still not clear. The aim of this study was to investigate details of ipsilateral suppression of TEOAEs in normally hearing adults.
Material and Methods:
Exactly 29 adults (13 males, 16 females, mean age 26.5 years, range 18–42 years), who passed a battery of tests including otoscopy, pure tone audiometry, immittance, and TEOAE tests, participated in the study. Suppression was evaluated by comparing TEOAEs obtained with and without an ipsilateral suppressor in a forward-masking paradigm.
Results:
In general, suppression was small – less than 1.4 dB at all frequencies studied. The spectrum of mean TEOAE suppression showed suppression was greatest between 586 and 3711 Hz (0.6–1.4 dB) but less than 0.6 dB between 3906 and 4883 Hz. Mean suppression increased with post-stimulus time from 0.1 dB in the 2–4 ms time window to a maximum of 2.26 dB in the 16–18 ms window; the mean suppression between 8 and 18 ms after noise stimulation was 1.32 dB (range=0.22–3.23 dB). There were no significant gender or ear-laterality effects. Noise levels as measured in the ear canal were found to have a significant effect on calculated suppression at some frequencies.
Conclusions:
The present study provides evidence of small ipsilateral TEOAE suppression by forward-masking noise in normally hearing adults. However, care is needed in interpreting the findings as noise in the ear canal can be a confounding factor during measurement of TEOAE suppression.
Measurement of the medial olivocochlear (MOC) reflex provides useful clinical information for understanding the function of the auditory system. Although transient evoked otoacoustic emission (TEOAE) suppression has been demonstrated to be an indicator of MOC activity, its full role and fine details of TEOAE suppression spectra are still not clear. The aim of this study was to investigate details of ipsilateral suppression of TEOAEs in normally hearing adults.
Material and Methods:
Exactly 29 adults (13 males, 16 females, mean age 26.5 years, range 18–42 years), who passed a battery of tests including otoscopy, pure tone audiometry, immittance, and TEOAE tests, participated in the study. Suppression was evaluated by comparing TEOAEs obtained with and without an ipsilateral suppressor in a forward-masking paradigm.
Results:
In general, suppression was small – less than 1.4 dB at all frequencies studied. The spectrum of mean TEOAE suppression showed suppression was greatest between 586 and 3711 Hz (0.6–1.4 dB) but less than 0.6 dB between 3906 and 4883 Hz. Mean suppression increased with post-stimulus time from 0.1 dB in the 2–4 ms time window to a maximum of 2.26 dB in the 16–18 ms window; the mean suppression between 8 and 18 ms after noise stimulation was 1.32 dB (range=0.22–3.23 dB). There were no significant gender or ear-laterality effects. Noise levels as measured in the ear canal were found to have a significant effect on calculated suppression at some frequencies.
Conclusions:
The present study provides evidence of small ipsilateral TEOAE suppression by forward-masking noise in normally hearing adults. However, care is needed in interpreting the findings as noise in the ear canal can be a confounding factor during measurement of TEOAE suppression.
REFERENCES (30)
1.
Kemp DT. Stimulated acoustic emissions from within the human auditory system. J Acoust Soc Am, 1978; 63: 1386–91.
2.
Dhar S, Hall JW. Otoacoustic emissions: Principles, procedures, and protocols. San Diego: Plural Publishing; 2012.
3.
Shera CA. Mammalian spontaneous otoacoustic emissions are amplitude-stabilized cochlear standing waves. J Acoust Soc Am, 2003; 114: 244–62.
4.
Shera CA, Guinan JJ. Evoked otoacoustic emissions arise by two fundamentally different mechanisms: A taxonomy for mammalian OAEs. J Acoust Soc Am, 1999; 105: 782–98.
5.
Guinan JJ. Olivocochlear efferents: Anatomy, physiology, function, and the measurement of efferent effects in humans. Ear Hear, 2006; 27: 589–607.
6.
Berlin CI, Hood LJ, Wen H, Szabo P, Cecola RP, Rigby P et al. Contralateral suppression of non-linear click-evoked otoacoustic emissions. Hear Res, 1993;71: 1–11.
7.
Dewey J, Dhar S. Medial olivocochlear influence on stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emission input-output functions. J Acoust Soc Am, 2012; 131: 3518.
8.
Garinis AC, Glattke T, Cone-Wesson BK. The MOC reflex during active listening to speech. J Sp Lang Hear Res, 2008; 54: 1464–76.
9.
Hood LJ, Berlin CI, Hurley A, Cecola RP, Bell B. Contralateral suppression of transient-evoked otoacoustic emissions in humans: intensity effects. Hear Res, 1996; 101: 113–18.
10.
Mishra SK, Lutman ME. Repeatability of click-evoked otoacoustic emission-based medial olivocochlear efferent assay. Ear Hear, 2013: 34: 789–798.
11.
Smith SB, Cone B. The medial olivocochlear reflex in children during active listening. Int J Audiol, 2015; 54(8): 518–23.
12.
Berlin CI, Hood LJ, Hurley AE, Wen AH, Kemp DT. Binaural noise suppresses linear click-evoked otoacoustic emissions more than ipsilateral or contralateral noise. Hear Res, 1995;87: 96–103.
13.
Hood LJ, Berlin CI, Bordelon J, Rose K. Patients with auditory neuropathy/dys-synchrony lack efferent suppression of transient evoked otoacoustic emissions. J Am Acad Audiol, 2003; 14: 302–13.
14.
Muchnik C, Ari-Even Roth D, Othman-Jebara R, Putter-Katz H, Shabtai EL, Hildesheimer M. Reduced medial olivocochlear bundle system function in children with auditory processing disorders. Audiol Neurotol, 2004; 9: 107–14.
15.
Maurer J, Beck A, Mann W, Mintert R. Changes in otoacoustic emissions with simultaneous acoustic stimulation of the contralateral ear in normal probands and patients with unilateral acoustic neurinoma. Laryngo-rhino-otologie, 1992; 71: 69– 73 (Article in German).
16.
Pracher D, Ryan S, Luxon L. Contralateral suppression of transient otoacoustic emissions and neuro-otology. Brit J Audiol, 1994; 28: 247–54.
17.
Veuillet E, Collet L, Duclaux R. Effect of contralateral acoustic stimulation on active cochlear micromechanical properties in human subjects: dependence on stimulus variables. J Neurophysiol, 1991;65: 724–35.
18.
Berlin CI, Goforth-Barter L, Hood LJ. Some hyperacusics show abnormally strong efferent suppression of TEOAEs. Association for Research in Otolaryngology Conference Abstract, 1998; 15: 117.
19.
Roup CM, Wiley TL, Safady SH, Stoppenbach DT. Tympanometric screening norms for adults. Am J Audiol, 1998; 7: 55–60.
20.
Wiley TL, Oviatt DL, Block MG. Acoustic-immittance measures in normal ears. J Speech Hear Res, 1987; 30: 161–70.
21.
Kei J, Sockalingam R, Holloway C, Agyik A, Brinin C, Baine D. Transient evoked otoacoustic emissions in adults: a comparison between two test protocols. J Am Acad Audiol, 2003;14: 563–73.
22.
Collet L, Kemp DT, Veuillet E, Duclaux R, Moulin A, Morgon A. Effect of contralateral auditory stimuli on active cochlear micro-mechanical properties in human subjects. Hear Res, 1990;43: 251–62.
23.
Hood LJ, Berlin CI, Wakefield L, Hurley A. Noise duration affects bilateral, ipsilateral and contralateral suppression of transient-evoked otoacoustic emissions in humans. Association for Research in Otolaryngology Conference Abstract, 1995; 19: 123.
24.
Wen H, Berlin CI, Hood LJ, Jackson DF, Hurley A. A program for quantification and analysis of transient evoked otoacoustic emissions. Association for Research in Otolaryngology Conference Abstract, 1993; 16: 102.
25.
Hood LJ. Suppression of otoacoustic emissions in normal individuals and in patients with auditory disorders. In: Robinette MS, Glattke TJ, editors. Otoacoustic Emissions: Clinical applications. 2nd ed. New York: Thieme; 2002; 325–47.
26.
Greenhouse SW, Geisser S. On the methods in the analysis of profile data. Psychometrika, 1959; 24: 95–112.
27.
Glattke TJ, Robinette MS. Transient evoked otoacoustic emissions. In: Robinette MS, Glattke TJ, editors. Otoacoustic Emissions: Clinical applications. 3rd ed. New York: Thieme; 2007; 63–82.
28.
Velenovsky DS, Glattke TJ. Contralateral and binaural suppression of otoacoustic emissions. In: Robinette MS, Glattke TJ, editors. Otoacoustic Emissions: Clinical applications. 2nd ed. New York: Thieme; 2002; 163–89.
29.
Tavartkiladze GA, Frolenkov GI, Artamasov SV. Ipsilateral suppression of transient evoked otoacoustic emission: role of the medial olivocochlear system. Acta Otolaryngol, 1996; 116: 213–18.
30.
Robinette MS. Clinical observations with evoked otoacoustic emissions at Mayo Clinic. J Am Acad Audiol, 2003; 14: 213–24.
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
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.
