European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
Exploring the relationship between electrophysiological measures of the electrically evoked auditory brainstem response and speech perception outcomes post-cochlear implantation.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Chen Zhongyan, Bi Qingling, Lv Yong, Liu Yang, Tian Yuanyuan, Liu Jianfeng, Yang Wenjing, Zhou Yukun, Huang Weiluo, Li Yuan
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: This study examined the relationships between electrophysiological measures of the electrically evoked auditory brainstem response (EABR) with speech perception measured in quiet after cochlear implantation (CI) to identify the ability of EABR to predict postoperative CI outcomes.
METHODS: Thirty-four patients with congenital prelingual hearing loss, implanted with the same manufacturer's CI, were recruited. In each participant, the EABR was evoked at apical, middle, and basal electrode locations. The following EABR measures were analyzed: wave III and V input/output (I/O) function, latency, threshold, threshold0.5 μV and Gibson scoring. Patients' speech perception abilities were assessed using the Mandarin Speech Perception (MSP) materials presented in quiet. The Categories of Auditory Performance (CAP) and Speech Intelligibility Rating (SIR) were also used to assess CI outcomes. A regression model was developed to explore the relationship between EABR and each speech measure, to identify parameters with significant predictive ability.
RESULTS: A significantly shorter eV latency, lower eV threshold, lower eV threshold0.5 μV and steeper I/O slopes for both eV and eIII were observed when these responses were evoked at the apical electrode, compared to the middle and basal positions. Implantation age was significantly negatively correlated with bisyllables recognition rate (R2 = 0.20, p = 0.0194). The eIII slope at the apical site and the eV slope at the basal site demonstrated the highest R2 values in positive correlation with CAP, both with R2 = 0.09. Among the EABR parameters, the regression models based on MSP bisyllables recognition rate, basal eV latency, eV thresholds and threshold0.5 μV recorded at the apical and middle positions were statistically significant.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study identified an apex-to-base gradient in EABR responsiveness following prolonged CI use. The threshold and I/O slopes of EABR appear to be informative predictors of speech perception performance in CI users, especially in the low-to-middle frequency range. However, further validation is needed.
METHODS: Thirty-four patients with congenital prelingual hearing loss, implanted with the same manufacturer's CI, were recruited. In each participant, the EABR was evoked at apical, middle, and basal electrode locations. The following EABR measures were analyzed: wave III and V input/output (I/O) function, latency, threshold, threshold0.5 μV and Gibson scoring. Patients' speech perception abilities were assessed using the Mandarin Speech Perception (MSP) materials presented in quiet. The Categories of Auditory Performance (CAP) and Speech Intelligibility Rating (SIR) were also used to assess CI outcomes. A regression model was developed to explore the relationship between EABR and each speech measure, to identify parameters with significant predictive ability.
RESULTS: A significantly shorter eV latency, lower eV threshold, lower eV threshold0.5 μV and steeper I/O slopes for both eV and eIII were observed when these responses were evoked at the apical electrode, compared to the middle and basal positions. Implantation age was significantly negatively correlated with bisyllables recognition rate (R2 = 0.20, p = 0.0194). The eIII slope at the apical site and the eV slope at the basal site demonstrated the highest R2 values in positive correlation with CAP, both with R2 = 0.09. Among the EABR parameters, the regression models based on MSP bisyllables recognition rate, basal eV latency, eV thresholds and threshold0.5 μV recorded at the apical and middle positions were statistically significant.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study identified an apex-to-base gradient in EABR responsiveness following prolonged CI use. The threshold and I/O slopes of EABR appear to be informative predictors of speech perception performance in CI users, especially in the low-to-middle frequency range. However, further validation is needed.