DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20162931

A study of brainstem auditory evoked responses in normal human subjects and normal variations as a function of stimulus and subject characteristics

Bidhan Ray, Santosh Raman, Sukanta Sen, Manuprita Sharma, K. C. Ghosh, A. M. Saha

Abstract


Background: Brainstem auditory evoked responses (BAERs) are electrophysiological investigations have widespread clinical utility in neurology, audiology, neonatology and anesthesiology. BAER responses exhibit a normal variability due to various non-pathologic factors and age is one of the variables suggested to have considerable influence on normal BAE responses. Aging changes in the auditory system may significantly influence the interpretation of the auditory brainstem responses in comparison with younger adults. The present study was undertaken to study the different parameters of brainstem evoked responses in normal subjects and their variations with changing stimulus and subject characteristics among average Indian people.

Methods: The test was conducted on 50 neuro-audiologically normal subjects (age-group of 5-60 years) selected from the OPD of ENT Department. Various audio-vestibular tests they were subjected to brainstem evoked response audiometry and responses were studied regarding various parameters of ABR details. An attempt was made to find out a normal range, normative values of various parameters and their variations with respect of their stimulus intensity and subject characteristics.

Results: In the present study it was observed that absolute latencies of all waves decreased with increasing stimulus intensity. The mean absolute latency values of all waves were prolonged in male than those of female subjects. The mean inter-peak latency values of I-III, III-V and I-V were also prolonged in male. Effects of change in stimulus rate on absolute latencies of all waves were observed. There were increases in absolute latencies of all waves with increasing stimulus rate.

Conclusions: Increased stimulus intensity caused decrease in latency values of all values. Wave V showed lesser degree of variation than the other components. Increase in stimulus rate caused increase in latency of all waves. Wave V showed lesser degree of variation than the other components. BERA can be performed with a wide range of stimulus variations. But what was clear in conclusion was that 60dB SL was the suitable intensity level. Also a wide variety of stimulus rate can be used in combination with either of the stimulus polarity. So any combination of stimulus intensity, rate and polarity may be used for clinical application of BERA. But essence is that there should be a prior adjustment of parameter norms according to subject and stimulus characteristics.


Keywords


Brainstem auditory evoked responses, Brainstem evoked response audiometry, Absolute latency, Inter-peak latency, Inter-aural latency

Full Text:

PDF

References


Chiappa KH, Martin JB, Young RR. Diagnostic Methods In Neurology: Disorders of the central nervous system, In Harrison’s principles of internal medicine edited by J B Martin Mc Graw-Hill, Inc. Hamburg. 1987;1913-21.

Gupta S, Gupta G, Singh S. Study of age-influences on brainstem auditory evoked potentials in healthy adults. International Journal of Biomedical Research. 2016;7(5):283-8.

Tafti FM, Gharib K, Teimuri H. Study of Age Effect on Brainstem Auditory Evoked Potential Waveforms. Journal of Medical Sciences. 2007;7(8):1362-5.

Rowe MJ. Normal variability of the brainstem auditory evoked response in young and old subjects. Electroencephalography and clinical Neurophysiology. 1978;441:459-70.

Dass S, Holi MS, Rajan SK. Quantitative Study on the Effect of Gender and Age on Brainstem Auditory Evoked Responses. International Journal of Engineering Science and Innovative Technology. 2012;1(1):36-43.

Sturzebecher E, Werbs M. Effects of age and sex on auditory brainstem response. A new aspect. Scand Audiol. 1987;16(3):153-57.

Claussen CF, DeSa JV. Clinical study of human equilibrium by electronystagmography and allied tests. Bombay: Popular Prakashan. 1978.

Kirtane MV. Standardization in Electronystagmography, Indian Journal of Otolaryngology. 1979;31(4):126-31.

Harinder JS, Sarup RS, Sharanjit K. The study of age and sex related changes in the brainstem auditory evoked potential. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. 2010;4:3495-9.

Patel KC, Shah CJ, Mehta HB. Effect of Age on Brainstem Auditory Evoked Potential. International Journal of Science and Research. 2014; 3(12):2551-5.

Bukart RF, Don M, Eggrmont JJ. Auditory evoked potentials basic principles and clinical application, Lippincott Williams & Wilkings. 2007:4-5.

Picton TW, Woods DL. Jacinthe baribeau braun AB, Healey TMG. Evoked potential Audiometry. The journal of otolaryngology. 1977;6(2):90-118.

Picton TW, Hillyaro SA, Krausz HI, Galambos R. Human Auditory Evoked Potentials. I: Evaluation of Components. Electroencephalography And Clinical Neurophysiology. 1974;36:179-90.

Guerreiro CAM, Ehrenberg BL. Brainstem Auditory Evoked Response. Application In Neurology ARQ Neuro-psiqui atria.1982;40(1):21-8.

Rahbar S, Abolhassami MD. Auditory Brainstem Response Classification Using Wavelet Transform and Multilayer Feed-forward Networks. Proceedings of the 4th IEEE-EMBS International Summer School and Symposium on Medical Devices and Biosensors, St Catharine's College, Cambridge, UK. 2007:128-31.

Lau SK, Wei WI. Brainstem evoked response audiometry and its application. J. Hong Kong Med Assoc. 1991;43(2):108-12.

Weston TET. Presbyacusis. The Journal of Laryngology & Otology. 1964;78:273-86.

Rosen S, Plester D, El-Moffy A, Rosen H. High frequency audiometry in presbycusis. Archs Otolar. 1964;79:18-32.

Manjuran TJ, Arora MML. Brain stem evoked response audiometry: The variations in latencies and amplitudes of normal subjects of different sex and age group. Indian J Otolaryngol. 1982;34(3):39-41.

Sharma U, Mann SBS, Dash RJ, Mehra YN. Brain stem evoked responses audiometry in diabetes mellitus. Indian Journal of Otolaryngology. 1987;39(4):163-6.

Kjaer M. Differences of latencies and amplitudes of brain stem evoked potentials in subgroups of a normal material. Acta Neurol Scand. 1979;59(2-3):72-9.

Stockard JJ, Rossiter VS. Clinical and pathologic correlates of brain stem auditory response abnormalities. Neurology. 1977;27(4):316-25.

Hecox K. Development of auditory brain stem responses in Gerber and Menchen (Eds.). The development of auditory behaviour. New York, Grune and Stratton Inc. 1983.

Deka RC, Kacker SK. Auditory brain stem responses in Meniere's diseases. Indian J Otolaryngol. 1986;38:30-3.

Zelman S. Correlation of smoking history with hearing loss. JAMA. 1973;223:920.

Drettner B, Hedstrand H, Klockhoff I, Svedberg A. Cardiovascular risk factors and hearing loss. A study of 1,000 fifty-year-old men. Acta Otolaryngol. 1975;79(5-6):366-71.

Virtaniemi J, Laakso M, Nuutinen J, Karjalainens. Auditory brain stem latencies in type I (IDDM.) diabetic patients. Amer Journal Otolaryngol. 1993;14(6):413-8.

Goldsher M, Pratt H, Hassan A, Shenhav R, Eliachar I, Kanter Y. Auditory brain stem evoked potentials in insulin dependent diabetics with and without peripheral neuropathy. Acta Otolaryngol. 1986;102:204.

Chiappa KH, Choi S, Young RR. The results of new method for the registration of human short latency somatosensory evoked responses. Neurology. 1978;28:385.

Stockard JE, Stockard JJ. Brainstem auditory evoked responses. Normal variation as function of stimulus & subject characteristics. Arch Neurol. 1979;36:823-31.

Coats AC, Martin JL. Human auditory nerve action potentials and brain stem evoked responses: effects of audiogram shape and lesion location. Arch Otolaryngol. 1977;103(10):605-22.

Gupta D, Vishwakarma SK. Brain stem auditory evoked response-evaluation of hearing loss. Indian Journal of Otolaryngology. 1989;41(2):54-8.

Galambos R, Hecox KE. Clinical applications of the auditory brain stem response. Otolaryngol. Clin. North Am. 1978;11:709-22.

Pelizzone M, Kasper A, Montandon P. Electrically Evoked Responses in Cochlear Implant Patients. Audiology. 1989;28:230-8.

Hecox K, Squires N, Galambos R. Brainstem auditory evoked responses in man. I. Effect of stimulus rise-fall time and duration. J Acoust Am. 1976;60:1187-92.

Wilder MB, Farley GR, Starr A. Endogenous late positive component of the evoked potential in cats corresponding to P300 in humans. Science. 1981;211:605-7.

Emerson RG, Pedley TA. Clinical neurophysiology: Electroencephalography and evoked potentials. In: Bradley WG, Daroff RB, Fenichel GM, Jankovic J, eds. Neurology in Clinical Practice. 6th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Butterworth-Heinemann. 2012.