Estimations of auditory sensitivity for young cochlear implant candidates using the ASSR: preliminary results

This paper presents preliminary results obtained with the use of the auditory steady-state response (ASSR) technique as part of a cochlear implant candidacy assessment protocol for infants Fifteen infants (30 ears), between 10 and 60 months of age, with severe-to-profound hearing loss participated in the study. ASSR measurements were performed for 0.5, 1, 2 and 4kHz at intensities up to 120-128dB HL. The ASSR thresholds were obtained in 74%, of the measurements, and exceeded the maximum auditory brainstem response (ABR) intensity output in 91% of cases and the maximum free-field behavioral intensity output in 84% of cases. Eighty-seven per cent of ASSR threshold measurements were measured at intensities of 100dB HL or higher, and almost half (47%) were measured at intensities of 115 dB HL and higher. Preliminary results indicate that absent ABR and behavioral thresholds do not preclude the possibility of residual hearing, making the ASSR a primary source of information regarding profound levels of hearing loss.     

Auditory steady-state response and auditory brainstem response thresholds in children

The inclusion of the auditory steady-state response (ASSR) into test-batteries for objective audiometry has allowed for clinical comparisons with the most widely used procedure, the auditory brainstem response (ABR). The current study describes ASSR and ABR thresholds for a group of infants and young children with various types and degrees of hearing loss. A sample of 48 subjects (23 female) with a mean age of 2.8 ± 1.9 years SD were assessed with a comprehensive test-battery and classified according to type and degree of hearing loss. Thresholds were determined with a broadband click-evoked ABR and single frequency ASSR evoked with continuous tones (0.25–4 kHz) amplitude modulated (67–95 Hz). Mean difference scores (±SD) between the ABR and high frequency ASSR thresholds were 9.8 (±11), 3.6 (±12) and 10.5 (±12) dB at 1, 2 and 4 kHz, respectively. An ASSR mean threshold for 2–4 and 1–4 kHz compared to the ABR threshold revealed an average difference of 7 (±9) and 7.9 (±8) dB, respectively. The overall correlation between the ABR and ASSR thresholds was highest for the mean ASSR thresholds of 2–4 and 1–4 kHz (r = 0.92 for both conditions). Correlations between the ABR and individual ASSR frequencies were slightly less (0.82–0.86). The average of the 2–4 kHz ASSR thresholds correlated best with the click-evoked ABR for all categories of hearing loss except for the sensorineural hearing loss category for which the 1–4 kHz ASSR average was better correlated to ABR thresholds. Findings demonstrate the reliability of verifying high frequency ASSR thresholds with a click-evoked ABR as an important cross-check in infants for whom behavioural audiometry may not be possible.     

Comparison of auditory steady-state responses and auditory brainstem responses in audiometric assessment of adults with sensorineural hearing loss

Objective

Many of the medico-legal patients who claimed compensation may exaggerate hearing loss that varies in degree, nature, and laterality. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether Auditory Steady-State Response (ASSR) could be used to predict the hearing level of adults, and whether ASSR could become a better testing method than Auditory brainstem response (ABR) in audiometric assessment of adults with sensorineural hearing loss.

Methods

This was a prospective study, which was conducted in a tertiary referral hospital. From January to June 2007, 142 subjects (284 ears) with varying degrees of sensori-neural hearing impairment were included in this study. Four commonly used frequencies (500, 1000, 2000, 4000 Hz) were evaluated. All subjects received pure-tone audiometry, multi-channel ASSR, and ABR tests for threshold measurement. The correlation of pure tone thresholds with ASSR and ABR thresholds were assessed.

Results

Between multi-channel ASSR and pure tone thresholds, a difference of less than 15 dB was found in 71% while a difference of less than 25 dB was found in 89% of patients. The correlation coefficient (r) of multi-channel ASSR and pure tone thresholds were 0.89, 0.95, 0.96, and 0.97 at 500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz, respectively. The strength of the relationship increased with increasing frequency. On the other hand, between ABR and pure-tone thresholds, a difference of less than 15 dB was found in 31%; a difference of less than 25 dB was found in 62% of patients. The r correlation value for ABR and pure tone thresholds was 0.83.

Conclusion

ASSR is a more reliable test for the accurate prediction of auditory thresholds than ABR. It can be a powerful and convenient electro-physiologic examination tool for clinically assessing of adults with sensorineural hearing loss.     

Aided auditory steady-state responses in infants

Infants with hearing loss routinely receive hearing aids several months before reliable behavioral responses to amplified sound can be observed. This necessitates objective measures to validate hearing-aid fittings. A single report has demonstrated the use of ASSRs to determine aided thresholds in children but data in young infants is still lacking. The current study explored aided ASSR compared to unaided ASSR thresholds and subsequent behavioral thresholds in a group of six young infants with hearing loss who received hearing aids between three and six months of age. Aided ASSR thresholds were obtained in 83% of frequencies where aided behavioral thresholds were obtained, with a mean threshold difference of 13±13 dB. The aided ASSR-based threshold estimates were within 15 dB of behavioral thresholds in 63% of cases, indicating a moderate correlation (r = 0.55). Comparing aided and unaided ASSR measurements revealed an average functional gain of 36±15 dB. These results indicate that ASSRs can provide the first evidence of robust hearing aid benefit in young infants several months before behavioral responses are observed.     

Comparison of auditory steady-state response and click-evoked auditory brain response in infants with different types and degrees of hearing loss

Abstract

Background: Auditory steady-state response (ASSR) and click-evoked auditory brain response (c-ABR) have been used for hearing assessment for decades years, the correlation of the two methods and the effects of type and degree of hearing loss (HL) to the correlation in infants younger than 6?months of age are unclear.

Objectives: To compare the correlation of ASSR and c-ABR and then to analyse the effects of type and degree of HL on the correlation in infants younger than 6?months of age.

Material and methods: Retrospective study comparing ASSR thresholds at various frequencies with c-ABR thresholds. 182 ears from 96 infants were assessed and classified according to types and degrees of HL.

Results: The correlation coefficients were: 0.823, 0.864, 0.891, 0.871, 0.908, 0.915 and 0.913 between ASSR thresholds at 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 2–4, 1–2–4, 0.5–1–2–4?kHz and c-ABR thresholds respectively. The correlation coefficients in the group of sensorineural HL (SHL) (r?=?0.763–0.900) were higher than conductive HL (r?=?0.309–0.619) across all frequencies. The coefficients of severe-profound SHL (r?=?0.595–0.790) were higher than mild-moderate SHL (r?=?0.434–0.687) across all frequencies.

Conclusions and significance: ASSR was one valuable cross-check measure by providing frequency specific information in auditory assessment.     

不同程度感音神经性听力损失儿童ASSR、click-ABR反应阈与行为听阈的相关性

目的 探讨不同程度感音神经性听力损失儿童听性稳态反应(ASSR)、短声听性脑干反应(click-ABR)与行为阈值的相关性及在听障儿童听力评估中的价值.方法 回顾性分析2019年1月至2019年12月确诊的46例(92耳)感音神经性听力损失儿童的ASSR、click-ABR及行为听阈结果,其中,轻度听力损失4耳,中度听...     

Evaluation of residual hearing in cochlear implants candidates using auditory steady-state response

Conclusion: The correlations between behavioral and auditory steady-state response (ASSR) thresholds were significant at 500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz. ASSR presented high sensitivity and specificity in the detection of residual hearing in cochlear implant candidates when compared with warble-tone audiometry. Objectives: To assess residual hearing in cochlear implant candidates by comparing the electrophysiological thresholds obtained in dichotic single-frequency ASSR with behavioral thresholds at 500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz. Methods: This was a comparative study between ASSR and warble-tone audiometry thresholds in 40 cochlear implant candidates (80 ears) before cochlear implantation with bilateral severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss. Results: Thresholds were obtained in 62.5% of all frequencies evaluated in warble-tone audiometry and in 63.1% in the ASSR. ASSR sensitivity was 96% and specificity was 91.6%. Mean differences between behavioral and ASSR thresholds did not reach significance at any frequencies. Strong correlations between behavioral and ASSR thresholds were observed in 500, 1000, and 2000 Hz and moderate in 4000 Hz, with correlation coefficients varying from 0.65 to 0.81. On 90% of occasions, ASSR thresholds were acquired within 10 dB of behavioral thresholds.     

Auditory steady-state responses for estimating moderate hearing loss

The auditory steady-state response (ASSR) has gained popularity as an alternative technique for objective audiometry but its use in less severe degrees of hearing loss has been questioned. The aim of this study was to investigate the usefulness of the ASSR in estimating moderate degrees of hearing loss. Seven subjects (12 ears) with moderate sensorineural hearing loss between 15 and 18 years of age were enrolled in the study. Forty-eight behavioural and ASSR thresholds were obtained across the frequencies of 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz. ASSR thresholds were determined using a dichotic multiple frequency recording technique. Mean threshold differences varied between 2 and 8 dB (±7–10 dB SD) across frequencies. The highest difference and variability was recorded at 0.5 kHz. The frequencies 1–4 kHz also revealed significantly better correlations (0.74–0.88) compared to 0.5 kHz (0.31). Comparing correlation coefficients for behavioural thresholds less than 60 and 60 dB and higher revealed a significant difference. Eighty-six percent of ASSR thresholds corresponded within 5 dB of moderate to severe behavioural thresholds compared to only 29% for mild to moderate thresholds in this study. The results confirm that the ASSR can reliably estimate behavioural thresholds of 60 dB and higher, but due to increased variability, caution is recommended when estimating behavioural thresholds of less than 60 dB, especially at 0.5 kHz.     

Auditory steady state response in pediatric audiology

The main issue regarding pediatric audiology diagnosis is determining procedures to configure reliable results which can be used to predict frequency-specific hearing thresholds.AimTo investigate the correlation between auditory steady-state response (ASSR) with other tests in children with sensorineural hearing loss.MethodsProspective cross-sectional contemporary cohort study. Twenty-three children (ages 1 to 7; mean, 3 years old) were submitted to ASSR, behavioral audiometry, click audiometry brain stem response (ABR), tone burst ABR, and predicting hearing level from the acoustic reflex.Resultsthe correlation between behavioral thresholds and ASSR was (0.70- 0.93), for the ABR tone burst it was (0.73 -0.93), for the ABR click it was (0.83-0.89) only at 2k and 4 kHz. The match between the ASSR and the hearing threshold prediction rule was considered moderate.Conclusionthere was a significant correlation between the ASSR and audiometry, as well as between ABR click (2k and 4 kHz) and for the ABR tone burst. The acoustic reflex can be used to add information to diagnosis in children.     

声场中记录的听性稳态助听反应阈与行为测试助听听阈的相关性

目的 应用多频听觉稳态反应(ASSR)Chirp刺激信号在声场中测试助听反应阈,观察其阈值与行为测试助听听阈的相关性,探讨多频听觉稳态反应Chirp刺激信号声场测试评估助听器补偿效果的临床意义.方法 选取22例(39耳)重度感音神经性听力损失、已配戴助听器的患儿(听障组)和16例(32耳)听力正常儿童(对照组)为研究对象.应用国际听力Eclipse EP25型多频稳态诱发电位仪及美国GSI-61型听力计,分别对听障组在声场中使用两种仪器测试助听听阈;对对照组进行裸耳行为听阈与声场中听觉稳态反应阈测试.结果 在0.5、1、2、4 kHz处,听障组ASSR助听反应阈与行为助听听阈的相关系数分别为0.65、0.68、0.77和0.82,P值均<0.01,显示两种测试结果有相关性;对照组裸耳行为听阈与声场中记录的听觉稳态反应阈在0.5、1、2、4 kHz配对t检验均呈显著差异(P<0.01),ASSR声场反应阈高于行为听阈20～30 dB HL.结论 应用多频听觉稳态反应Chirp刺激信号声场测试进行助听器补偿效果评估在临床上具有可行性.     

两种不同长度的人工耳蜗电极对不同频率残余听力的影响

目的探讨植入两种不同长度的人工耳蜗电极对患者不同频率残余听力的影响。方法以中耳、内耳无明显异常的15例单侧植入Nucleus 24型人工耳蜗(A组,电极长度17mm)患儿与15例单侧植入Medel C40+15型(B组,电极长度29.2mm)人工耳蜗患儿为对象,两组对象于手术前后分别进行听性稳态反应(ASSR)测试,比较不同长度的人工耳蜗电极植入对不同频率听力的影响。结果①人工耳蜗植入后一月开机经耳蜗电刺激后,有51.67%患者植入耳保留残余听力;②手术前0.5、1、2、4kHz ASSR反应阈A组分别为98.93±6.28、107.80±8.16、104.07±8.83及104.73±5.93dB HL,B组分别为99.67±4.20、110.87±8.17、109.93±7.51及106.93±4.35dB HL;手术后一月上述各频率ASSR反应阈A组分别为101.60±4.64、112.60±6.11、106.13±5.19及106.60±6.25dB HL;B组分别为101.40±3.96、116.33±2.58、113.13±3.84及108.46±3.76dB HL;③术后B组0.5、1kHz的残余听力损伤明显,2、4kHz处残余听力损伤程度与A组差异无统计学意义;④A组术后残余听力损失以1kHz最显著,B组术后残余听力损失以500Hz最显著。结论人工耳蜗植入及耳蜗电极电刺激对植入耳的残余听力并非完全破坏,电极长短对不同频率残余听力会造成不同程度的损害,植入电极越长,植入耳蜗的部位越深,对低频残余听力损伤越明显。     

Clinical Comparison of the Auditory Steady-State Response with the Click Auditory Brainstem Response in Infants

Objectives

Our goal was to determine the effectiveness of using the auditory steady state response (ASSR) as a measure of hearing thresholds in infants who are suspected of having significant hearing loss, as compared with using the click-auditory brainstem response (C-ABR).

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed the audiologic profiles of 76 infants (46 boys and 30 girls, a total of 151 ears) who ranged in age from 1 to 12 months (average age: 5.7 months). The auditory evaluations in 76 infants who were suspected of having hearing loss were done via the C-ABR and ASSR. In addition, for reference, the mean ASSR thresholds were compared to those of 39 ears of infants and 39 ears of adults with normal hearing at 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz.

Results

The highest correlation between the C-ABR and ASSR thresholds was observed at an average of 2-4 kHz (r=0.94). On comparison between the hearing of infants and adults at 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz, the mean ASSR threshold in infants was 12, 7, 8, and 7 dB higher, respectively, than that in adults.

Conclusion

ASSR testing may provide additional audiometric information for accurately predicting the hearing sensitivity, and this is essential for the management of infants with severe to profound hearing loss.     

Comparison of threshold estimation in infants with hearing loss or normal hearing using auditory steady-state response evoked by narrow band CE-chirps and auditory brainstem response evoked by tone pips

Objective: The objective of this study is to compare air-conduction thresholds obtained with ASSR evoked by narrow band (NB) CE-chirps and ABR evoked by tone pips (tpABR) in infants with various degrees of hearing loss. Design: Thresholds were measured at 500, 1000, 2000 and 4000?Hz. Data on each participant were collected at the same day. Study sample: Sixty-seven infants aged 4 d to 22 months (median age?=?96 days), resulting in 57, 52, 87 and 56 ears for 500, 1000, 2000 and 4000?Hz, respectively. Results: Statistical analysis was performed for ears with hearing loss (HL) and showed a very strong correlation between tpABR and ASSR evoked by NB CE-chirps: 0.90 (n?=?28), 0.90 (n?=?28), 0.96 (n?=?42) and 0.95 (n?=?30) for 500, 1000, 2000 and 4000?Hz, respectively. At these frequencies, the mean difference between tpABR and ASSR was ?3.6?dB (±?7.0), ?5.2?dB (±?7.3), ?3.9?dB (±?5.2) and ?5.2?dB (±?4.7). Linear regression analysis indicated that the relationship was not influenced by the degree of hearing loss. Conclusion: We propose that dB nHL to dB eHL correction values for ASSR evoked by NB CE-chirps should be 5?dB lower than values used for tpABR.     

Threshold prediction using the auditory steady-state response and the tone burst auditory brain stem response: a within-subject comparison

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy with which auditory steady-state response (ASSR) and tone burst auditory brain stem response (ABR) thresholds predict behavioral thresholds, using a within-subjects design. Because the spectra of the stimuli used to evoke the ABR and the ASSR differ, it was hypothesized that the predictive accuracy also would differ, particularly in subjects with steeply sloping hearing losses. DESIGN: ASSR and ABR thresholds were recorded in a group of 14 adults with normal hearing, 10 adults with flat, sensorineural hearing losses, and 10 adults with steeply sloping, high-frequency, sensorineural hearing losses. Evoked-potential thresholds were recorded at 1, 1.5, and 2 kHz and were compared with behavioral, pure-tone thresholds. The predictive accuracy of two ABR protocols was evaluated: Blackman-gated tone bursts and linear-gated tone bursts presented in a background of notched noise. Two ASSR stimulation protocols also were evaluated: 100% amplitude-modulated (AM) sinusoids and 100% AM plus 25% frequency-modulated (FM) sinusoids. RESULTS: The results suggested there was no difference in the accuracy with which either ABR protocol predicted behavioral threshold, nor was there any difference in the predictive accuracy of the two ASSR protocols. On average, ABR thresholds were recorded 3 dB closer to behavioral threshold than ASSR thresholds. However, in the subjects with the most steeply sloping hearing losses, ABR thresholds were recorded as much as 25 dB below behavioral threshold, whereas ASSR thresholds were never recorded more than 5 dB below behavioral threshold, which may reflect more spread of excitation for the ABR than for the ASSR. In contrast, the ASSR overestimated behavioral threshold in two subjects with normal hearing, where the ABR provided a more accurate prediction of behavioral threshold. CONCLUSIONS: Both the ABR and the ASSR provided reasonably accurate predictions of behavioral threshold across the three subject groups. There was no evidence that the predictive accuracy of the ABR evoked using Blackman-gated tone bursts differed from the predictive accuracy observed when linear-gated tone bursts were presented in conjunction with notched noise. Similarly, there was no evidence that the predictive accuracy of the AM ASSR differed from the AM/FM ASSR. In general, ABR thresholds were recorded at levels closer to behavioral threshold than the ASSR. For certain individuals with steeply sloping hearing losses, the ASSR may be a more accurate predictor of behavioral thresholds; however, the ABR may be a more appropriate choice when predicting behavioral thresholds in a population where the incidence of normal hearing is expected to be high.     

Analysis of audiological results of patients referred from newborn hearing screening program

Conclusion: As tools of confirmation of sensorineural hearing loss in neonates who are ‘referred’ from a newborn hearing screening program, both ASSR and DPOAE have high sensitivity and specificity. In addition, ASSR can be used as a substitute for ABR. Objectives: To analyze the confirmative audiological results of patients referred from a newborn hearing screening program. Patients and method: From January 2007 to December 2013, hearing tests were performed on 474 babies (804 ears) who were ‘referred’ from the hospital or other maternity centers. Auditory brainstem response (ABR), auditory steady-state response (ASSR), and distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAE) were used for hearing evaluation. Results: Of 474 babies (804 ears), 232 had normal hearing, while 242 babies (358 ears) had over 30 dB nHL threshold from ABR. Among the 156 babies (312 ears) who underwent both ABR and ASSR, the mean ASSR threshold had a strong correlation with ABR threshold (r = 0.942, p < 0.001). Assuming that ABR results were the yardstick of abnormal hearing, sensitivity and specificity of ASSR to ABR were 90.6% and 95%. DPOAE tests were performed on 180 babies (360 ears), with sensitivity of 85.9% and specificity of 84.4%.     

Determining the upper limits of stimulation for auditory steady-state response measurements

OBJECTIVE: To determine the maximum stimulus levels at which a measured auditory steady-state response (ASSR) can be assumed to be a reliable measure of auditory thresholds. DESIGN: ASSR thresholds were measured at octave frequencies from 500 to 4000 Hz in 10 subjects with profound hearing loss. These subjects provided no behavioral responses to sound at the limits of pure-tone audiometers and at the limits of the stimulus levels produced by the ASSR device. Subjects were divided into two groups of five, with repeated measures obtained within the same session in one group and repeated measures obtained in a separate session on a different day in the other group. RESULTS: ASSR thresholds were observed in all 10 subjects at each of four frequencies and in both trials. On average, these ASSR thresholds were observed at 100 dB HL (SD = 5 dB). Because these responses were at least 18 to 22 dB below the limits of the equipment where all subjects had no behavioral responses, it is reasonable to conclude that the ASSRs were not generated by the auditory system. CONCLUSIONS: An artifact or distortion may be present in the recording of ASSRs at high levels. These data bring into question the view that there is a wider dynamic range for ASSR measurements compared with auditory brain stem response measurements, at least with current implementation.     

Establishing normal hearing with the dichotic multiple-frequency auditory steady-state response compared to an auditory brainstem response protocol

OBJECTIVE: To determine the clinical usefulness of the dichotic multiple-frequency (MF) auditory steady-state response (ASSR) technique for estimating normal hearing compared to a 0.5-kHz tone burst and broadband click auditory brainstem response (ABR) protocol in a sample of adults. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A comparative experimental research design was selected in order to compare estimations of normal hearing obtained with the dichotic ASSR technique at 0.5, 1, 2 and 4 kHz with a 0.5-kHz tone burst and broadband click ABR protocol. The recording times required for each procedure were also compared. Normal-hearing subjects (n = 28) were selected according to immittance values within normal limits and pure-tone behavioural thresholds of < 25 dB HL across frequencies. RESULTS: The dichotic MF ASSR estimated normal hearing to be, on average, 30-34 dB HL across the range 0.5-4 kHz. The mean estimate of normal hearing for 0.5 kHz using tone burst ABRs was 30 dB nHL and the mean click ABR threshold was 16 dB nHL, i.e. 14-18 dB better than the ASSR thresholds. The dichotic MFASSR technique recorded 8 thresholds (4 in each ear) in a mean time of 23 min. The ABR protocol recorded 4 thresholds (2 in each ear) in a mean time of 25 min. CONCLUSION: Both the dichotic MF ASSR and ABR protocols provided a time-efficient estimation of normal hearing. There was no significant difference between the tone burst ABR and MF ASSR techniques in terms of estimation of normal hearing at 0.5 kHz. The dichotic MF ASSR technique proved more time-efficient by determining more thresholds in a shorter time compared to the ABR protocol.     

Prevalence of auditory neuropathy (AN) among infants and young children with severe to profound hearing loss

Auditory neuropathy is a challenging disorder and needs special habilitative/rehabilitative approach. This study aimed to detect its prevalence among infants and young children with severe to profound hearing loss. 112 infants and young children with age ranged 6-32 months were examined and diagnosed as having severe to profound hearing loss and were referred for hearing aid fitting. Those infants were reassessed in our centers for detecting cases with auditory neuropathy. The study group was subjected to immittancemetry, behavioral observation audiometry, ABR and cochlear microphonics.

Results

15 patients were found to have auditory neuropathy according to our criteria for diagnosis.

Conclusions

The prevalence of AN in the study group was 13.4%. CM were recommended to be tested routinely during ABR assessment whenever abnormal results are obtained.     

脑性瘫痪患儿听性脑干反应及多频稳态听性反应分析

目的：通过听性脑干诱发反应（ABR）及听性稳态反应（ASSR）分析，探讨脑性瘫痪（脑瘫）患儿的听力障碍及脑干听通道功能变化。方法：采用美国GSIAudera听性脑干反应及听性稳态诱发电位测试仪，测试脑瘫患儿52例104耳。对照组为同龄健康儿童19例38耳。结果：脑瘫组患儿的ABR各波潜伏期及峰间潜伏期均较对照组明显延长；脑瘫组ASSR结果以轻度低频听力损失为著，并且各频率听力损失的平均值非常接近。结论：ABR和ASSR同时应用，为脑瘫患儿听力损失进行定性定量诊断提供了客观的测试方法。     

极重度听损大前庭水管综合征婴幼儿患者ABR和ASSR结果分析

目的通过对极重度听力损失的大前庭水管综合征婴幼儿进行听性脑干反应（ABR）和多频稳态反应（ASSR）测试,探讨其ABR检查过程中出现的声诱发短潜伏期负向波（acoustically evoked short latency negative response,ASNR）及其ASSR特点。方法回顾性研究22例（42耳）极重度听力损失的大前庭水管综合征（LVAS）婴幼儿,另选择28例（56耳）极重度听力损失的非LVAS的感音神经性耳聋婴幼儿作为对照组,研究其ABR及ASSR相关性。结果①LVAS婴幼儿组ABR测试中,36耳（85．7％）记录到AsNR,在109．6 dB nHL刺激强度引出的ASNR平均潜伏期在3．04±0．22msT对照组中婴幼儿无一例记录到ASNR。②LVAS婴幼儿组ASSRNI]试在250、500和1000Hz引出率明显高于对照组,两组间差异有统计学意义（P〈0．01）。结论相比于普通的极重度感音神经性耳聋患儿,极重度听损LVAS患儿进行听力学检查时,ABR容易出现ASNR负向波,ASSR测试结果显示较高的中低频的电位反应引出率,此结果可用于临床辅助诊断大前庭水管综合征。