Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2023
Electrically evoked auditory responses: A classification for brainstem implant placement in Neurofibromatosis Type 2.
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.
Matthies Cordula, Zeller Laura, Kurz Anja, Rak Kristen, Hagen Rudolf, Shehata-Dieler Wafaa
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: In auditory brainstem implant (ABI) surgery, array placement may be optimized by electrophysiological information of adequate brainstem activation gained from electrically evoked auditory brainstem responses (EABR). This study aims 1) to characterize in detail the EABR from ABI implantation, 2) to introduce an EABR Classification Scheme, and 3) to analyze data for their correlation with individual patients' findings.
METHODS: Out of a continuous series of 54 patients who received an ABI between 2005 and 2019, 23 Neurofibromatosis Type 2 patients with complete documentation of 154 recordings were selected for offline analysis and for development and evaluation of a new EABR Classification Scheme comprising Class A: three vertex positive peaks, Class B:two peaks, Class C: a combination of one peak and a second melted double peak, Class D: one sole vertex positive peak and Class E: no peaks.
RESULTS: All 23 subjects showed EABR at final ABI position and experienced auditory sensations at first activation. The most frequent morphology consisted of two peaks, Classes B and C. Identified mean latencies were for P1 0.42 ms (±0.095), P2 1.42 ms (±0.244) and P3 2.41 ms (±0.329). Peak latencies correlated positively with tumor extensions (p < 0.005).
CONCLUSIONS: This study provides clear instructions on optimal EABR performance and evaluation.
SIGNIFICANCE: The new EABR Classification Scheme relies on a fast "online" identification of vertex positive peaks at the estimated post-artifact phase. The variability in EABR morphology provides an individual snapshot of the actual structural and functional status of the brainstem.
METHODS: Out of a continuous series of 54 patients who received an ABI between 2005 and 2019, 23 Neurofibromatosis Type 2 patients with complete documentation of 154 recordings were selected for offline analysis and for development and evaluation of a new EABR Classification Scheme comprising Class A: three vertex positive peaks, Class B:two peaks, Class C: a combination of one peak and a second melted double peak, Class D: one sole vertex positive peak and Class E: no peaks.
RESULTS: All 23 subjects showed EABR at final ABI position and experienced auditory sensations at first activation. The most frequent morphology consisted of two peaks, Classes B and C. Identified mean latencies were for P1 0.42 ms (±0.095), P2 1.42 ms (±0.244) and P3 2.41 ms (±0.329). Peak latencies correlated positively with tumor extensions (p < 0.005).
CONCLUSIONS: This study provides clear instructions on optimal EABR performance and evaluation.
SIGNIFICANCE: The new EABR Classification Scheme relies on a fast "online" identification of vertex positive peaks at the estimated post-artifact phase. The variability in EABR morphology provides an individual snapshot of the actual structural and functional status of the brainstem.