Bayrak Seda, Mutlu Başak, Kırkım Günay, Şerbetçioğlu Bülent
Department of Audiology, Dokuz Eylül University School of Health Sciences, İzmir, Turkey.
Department of Audiology, İstanbul Medeniyet University School of Health Sciences İstanbul, Turkey.
Turk Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2019 Jun;57(2):81-85. doi: 10.5152/tao.2019.4130. Epub 2019 Jun 27.
To investigate the relationship between electrically evoked compound action potentials (ECAP) and electrically evoked auditory brainstem responses (EABR) in children with cochlear implants (CI) without inner ear anomalies.
Sixteen children between the ages of two and six years who were CI users participated in the study. ECAP thresholds were recorded from one electrode in the basal, medial, and apical regions of the cochlear implant. EABRs were recorded from electrodes whose ECAP thresholds were determined. The latency-intensity functions, amplitude and morphological analyzes of the eIII and eV waves at 200 and 180 current unit (CU) excitation levels were performed. The data obtained were analyzed statistically.
ECAP thresholds were found to be 171.5±11.38, 169.69±20.32 and 160.81±20.03 CU at the basal, medial and apical electrodes, respectively. EABR thresholds were also found to be 169.69±12.17, 165.62±16.41 and 160±15.49 CU in basal, medial and apical electrodes, respectively. There was a strong positive correlation between ECAP and EABR thresholds in apical, medial and basal electrodes (p<0.05). EABR threshold levels were not significantly different between basal, medial and apical region electrodes (p>0.05), and ECAP threshold values were significantly different between apical and basal region electrodes (p=0.002). When the significance values of EABR eV wave latencies were analyzed in terms of electrode region, the difference between basal and apical regions was found to be significant (p=0.03).
Consistency was found between ECAP and EABR recordings. However, it was concluded that one could not be preferred over the other because the data quality of the two tests was different. In future studies, ECAP and EABR recordings may be recommended by selecting more electrodes for stimulation.
探讨无内耳异常的人工耳蜗植入（CI）儿童的电诱发复合动作电位（ECAP）与电诱发听性脑干反应（EABR）之间的关系。
16名年龄在2至6岁的CI使用者参与了本研究。从人工耳蜗基底、中部和顶部区域的一个电极记录ECAP阈值。从已确定ECAP阈值的电极记录EABR。在200和180电流单位（CU）刺激水平下，对eIII和eV波的潜伏期-强度函数、幅度及形态进行分析。对获得的数据进行统计学分析。
基底、中部和顶部电极的ECAP阈值分别为171.5±11.38、169.69±20.32和160.81±20.03 CU。基底、中部和顶部电极的EABR阈值分别为169.69±12.17、165.62±16.41和160±15.49 CU。顶部、中部和基底电极的ECAP与EABR阈值之间存在强正相关（p<0.05）。基底、中部和顶部区域电极之间的EABR阈值水平无显著差异（p>0.05），而顶部和基底区域电极之间的ECAP阈值存在显著差异（p=0.002）。当按电极区域分析EABR eV波潜伏期的显著性值时，发现基底和顶部区域之间的差异具有显著性（p=0.03）。
ECAP和EABR记录之间具有一致性。然而，得出的结论是，由于两项测试的数据质量不同，不能优先选择其中一项。在未来的研究中，可能建议通过选择更多电极进行刺激来进行ECAP和EABR记录。
