Arslan E, Turrini M, Lupi G, Genovese E, Orzan E
Audiology and Phoniatrics Department, University of Padova, Italy.
Scand Audiol Suppl. 1997;46:32-7.
Two-hundred-and-sixty uncooperative children (442 ears) performed auditory brainstem response (ABR) and Electrocochleography (ECochG) in the same diagnostic session under general anaesthesia, and the results obtained with the two different methods were compared. A difference > or = 20 dB between the two methods was found in 134 ears (30.3%). The presence of middle ear effusion and symptoms of a possible central nervous system pathology were considered in order to verify the evidence of a correlation between the difference in ABR-ECochG results and these clinical parameters. The presence of middle ear effusion was not significantly correlated with differences > or = 20 dB (p = 0.1347). On the contrary, the presence of symptoms indicative of a possible central nervous system (CNS) involvement was significantly correlated with differences > or = 20 dB (p = 0.0000). ABR has to be considered the first choice in hearing assessment strategy, either for screening or diagnosis. However, the diagnosis of hearing loss only on the basis of the presence or absence of wave V requires some care in case of suspected central auditory pathway lesions. In these cases, ECochG may be the only reliable diagnostic tool for hearing assessment in uncooperative subjects.
260名不配合的儿童(442耳)在全身麻醉下于同一诊断环节进行了听性脑干反应(ABR)和耳蜗电图(ECochG)检查,并对两种不同方法所获结果进行了比较。在134耳(30.3%)中发现两种方法之间的差异≥20 dB。考虑了中耳积液的存在以及可能的中枢神经系统病变的症状,以验证ABR-ECochG结果差异与这些临床参数之间相关性的证据。中耳积液的存在与≥20 dB的差异无显著相关性(p = 0.1347)。相反,提示可能存在中枢神经系统(CNS)受累的症状与≥20 dB的差异显著相关(p = 0.0000)。无论是用于筛查还是诊断,ABR都应被视为听力评估策略的首选。然而,仅基于波V的有无来诊断听力损失,在怀疑有中枢听觉通路病变的情况下需要谨慎。在这些情况下,ECochG可能是不配合受试者听力评估的唯一可靠诊断工具。