纯音听阈正常的耳鸣患者TEOAE检测结果分析

目的：分析纯音听阈正常的耳鸣患者TEOAE的检测结果及意义。方法对56例（102耳）纯音听阈正常的耳鸣患者（耳鸣组）进行 TEOAE 检测,并与46例健康对照组比较。结果耳鸣组的 TEOAE 检出率（82．35％,84／102）低于对照组（100％,92／92）（P＜0．05）。耳鸣组各频带TEOAE的信噪比及重复性低于对照组,差异有统计学意义（P＜0．05或P＜0．01）。结论部分纯音听阈正常的耳鸣患者TEOAE未引出,说明其耳蜗外毛细胞功能已有损害。     

一家系遗传性进行性感音神经性聋耳声发射测试分析

目的 :探讨耳声发射 ( OAE)测试对遗传性进行性感音神经性聋的诊断意义。方法 :对一家系 6代中 5 4例 ( 10 8耳 )和 5 0例正常人进行了纯音测听、瞬态诱发耳声发射 ( TEOAE)和畸变产物耳声发射 ( DPOAE)测试 ,了解其耳蜗功能。结果 :本家系纯音听阈 >2 0 d B HL组中 ,84%出现 TEOAE反应幅度下降或消失 ,82 %出现DPOAE振幅下降或消失 ;纯音听阈正常组中 ,75 %出现 TEOAE反应幅度下降 ,6 4%出现 DPOAE某个频率的振幅下降或缺失 ;对照组 TEOAE和 DPOAE的检出率均为 10 0 %。结论 :OAE测试有助于遗传性进行性感音神经性聋的早期诊断     

纯音听阈值正常的中青年耳鸣群体耳蜗功能分析

目的 通过纯音听阈值正常的中青年耳鸣群体的耳声发射结果探讨耳鸣群体的耳蜗功能对耳鸣发生的作用。方法 回顾性分析比较64例中青年耳鸣患者和30例纯音听阈值正常的无耳鸣人群畸变产物耳声发射(distortion product otoacoustic emission, DPOAE)、瞬态诱发耳声发射(transient evoked otoacoustic emission, TEOAE)、自发性耳声发射(spontaneous otoacoustic emission, SOAE)的结果,并对SOAE的频率和耳鸣群体的耳鸣匹配频率进行分析和比较。结果 耳鸣组和对照组性别、年龄和平均纯音听阈阈值差异均无统计学意义(P=0.079,P=0.078,P=0.081)。耳鸣组和对照组DPOAE测试所有频率的通过率,除6 000 Hz(P=0.012)外,两组之间差异无统计学意义(P均>0.05)。耳鸣组和对照组TEOAE测试所有频率的通过率两组之间差异有统计学意义(P均<0.05)。对照组SOAE引出率为31.67%,频率范围分布在1 211～4 453 Hz;耳鸣组SOAE引出率...     

自觉听力正常的后循环缺血患者纯音听阈与耳声发射结果分析

目的：探讨自觉听力正常的后循环缺血（posterior circulation ischemia ,PCI）患者的纯音测听和耳声发射的结果及临床意义。方法选择经临床确诊为PCI且自觉听力正常的患者40例（80耳）作为实验组,健康成年人30例（60耳）作为对照组,两组均行纯音测听、瞬态诱发耳声发射（TEOAE）和畸变产物耳声发射（DPOAE）检查,对结果进行统计学分析。结果 PCI组125～8000 Hz各频率气导听阈与对照组比较差异无统计学意义（ P＞0．05）;PCI组的TEOAE检出率（47．5％,38／80）低于对照组（95．0％,57／60）,差异有统计学意义（P＜0．01）;PCI组DPOAE各频率检出率、幅值均低于健康对照组（P＜0．05）,尤以高频区明显（P＜0．01）。结论后循环缺血可以影响耳蜗的血液供应,导致常规纯音测听难以发现的耳蜗功能损害,尤以高频区明显。     

扩展高频畸变产物耳声发射在纯音听阈正常的耳鸣患者中的临床应用

目的 分析纯音听阈正常的耳鸣患者扩展高频畸变产物耳声发射(EHF DPOAE)的特点，探讨在常规纯音检测结果正常情况下，EHF DPOAE发现早期隐匿性听力损失的临床意义。方法 选取常规纯音听阈正常的耳鸣患者68例(104耳)为实验组，对照组为纯音听阈正常无耳鸣症状的志愿者40例(40耳)。两组均用Neuro-Audio耳声发射仪进行常规频率(1～6 kHz)畸变产物耳声发射(DPOAE)测试、EHF DPOAE(8～12 kHz)测试。结果 对照组常规频率DPOAE的平均检出率为97.2%,EHF DPOAE的检出率为88.7%;实验组常规频率DPOAE的检出率为72.2%,EHF DPOAE的检出率为51.2%。实验组EHF DPOAE引出率明显低于对照组EHF DPOAE引出率(P<0.001);实验组EHF DPOAE中振幅值明显低于对照组EHF DPOAE的振幅值(P<0.001);实验组EHF DPOAE的平均信噪比值明显低于对照组EHF DPOAE的平均信噪比值(P<0.001)。结论 在常规纯音听力检测正常的特发性耳鸣患者中，EHF DPOAE的引出率...     

单侧耳蜗性聋患者对侧耳耳声发射的表现

目的 :探讨致聋因素在致单耳发病时对对侧耳潜在的影响。方法 :利用OtodynamicILO96耳声发射分析仪 ,对 35例单侧耳蜗性聋患者 (分为 5组 :发病 2个月以内的突发性聋 9例为S1组 ,发病 1年以上的突发性聋 6例为S2 组 ,梅尼埃病 13例分为M1、M2 组 ,不明机理的耳蜗性聋 7例为UNK组 )对侧耳瞬态诱发性耳声发射 (TEOAE)的反应幅值、反应重复率及频带的重复率 ,畸变产物耳声发射 (DPOAE)曲线特点及 1～ 5kHz反应幅值进行分析比较。结果 :S1组、M2 组TEOAE的反应幅值、反应重复性、频带重复性明显低于正常值 ,DPOAE幅值明显降低 ;S2 组、M1组、UNK组TEOAE和DPOAE正常。结论 :在不同致聋因素中 ,有的对单耳产生损伤作用 ,有的对双耳产生损伤作用。     

阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停低通气综合征患者的早期听觉损害评估手段探讨

目的探讨阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停低通气综合征(OSAHS)患者的早期听觉损害评估方法。方法对31例(62耳)OSAHS患者和20例(40耳)对照组,分别检测常频(0.125～8 kHz)纯音气骨导和扩展高频(8～16 kHz)气导听阈、瞬态诱发性耳声发射(TEOAE)及畸变产物耳声发射(DPOAE)。结果①常频纯音听阈两组间无显著差异,而扩展高频听阈OSAHS组明显高于对照组(t=3.045～3.779,P=0.000～0.003);②TEOAE检出率OSAHS组为37.1%,而对照组为92.5%,组间差异显著,χ2=30.82,P=0.000;③在各个频率点DPOAE检出率和振幅,OSAHS组明显低于对照组(检出率χ2=22.94～34.31,P=0.000～0.000;振幅t=-2.740～-9.980,P=0.000～0.008)。结论对于OSAHS患者建议用耳声发射、扩展高频测听进行早期听觉损害评估。     

单侧突发性聋患者对侧耳耳声发射分析

目的研究突发性聋患者单耳发病时对侧耳的耳蜗功能状态。方法利用Capella耳声发射仪对单侧突发性聋患者的对侧耳50例(50耳,病例组)及正常人30例(60耳,对照组)分别进行瞬态声诱发耳声发射(TEOAE)及畸变产物耳声发射(DPOAE)检测,记录和分析TEOAE的通过率及各频率DPOAE的检出率、幅值。结果①TEOAE通过率对照组为100%,病例组为75%,两组比较差异有统计学意义(χ2=20.84,P<0.01);②DPOAE检出率在0.5、0.75、1.0、3.0、4.0 kHz频点上,病例组低于对照组(P<0.05或P<0.01);③与对照组相比,病例组各频率DPOAE的幅值均降低,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05或P<0.01)。结论部分突发性聋患者的对侧耳已出现早期耳蜗功能受累,利用耳声发射分析方法可在听力损失出现之前早期发现此类病变。     

听力正常耳鸣与诱发性耳声发射的关系

目的:分析听力正常的耳鸣患者的耳蜗功能,探讨耳鸣的客观检查手段。方法:对听力正常的单侧 耳鸣患者50例(50耳,耳鸣1组)、听力正常的双侧耳鸣患者23例(46耳,耳鸣2组)和正常人34例(68耳,对照 组)进行瞬态诱发耳声发射(TEOAE)和畸变产物耳声发射(DPOAE)。耳鸣1、2组同时进行耳鸣频率匹配检查, 并分析在TEOAE及DPOAE测试结果中有无相应表现。结果:①TEOAE通过率,耳鸣1组为64.0%,耳鸣2组 为91.3%,对照组为100%(1组P<0.01,2组P>0.05);②DPOAE通过率,3组均为100%;但耳鸣1组在 3.125kHz及8.837kHz的波幅均值较对照组低,两组差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05);③耳鸣音调分布为0.25 ～8.00kHz。在TEOAE频谱中及DPOAE听力图中,部分耳表现出与匹配频率相对应的低反应峰或频率成分 缺失以及低幅值。结论:部分听力正常的耳鸣患者已有耳蜗毛细胞的损害;TEOAE及DPOAE可以作为外周性 耳鸣诊断的一种客观检测方法;前者对耳蜗性耳鸣的早期诊断敏感而直观,而后者适用于耳鸣的频率分析。     

听阈正常耳鸣患者听性脑干反应检测的特点及临床意义

目的研究听阈正常耳鸣患者听性脑干反应(auditory brainstem response,ABR)、畸变产物耳声发射(dis-tortion product evoked otoacoustic emissions, DPOAE)客观测试结果的特点,探讨ABR检测在耳鸣中的意义。方法对24例听力正常单侧耳鸣为主诉的患者进行纯音听阈、DPOAE和ABR检测,对比耳鸣侧和健侧的听阈、DPOAE各频率检出率及幅值和ABR各波波幅及潜伏期结果,进行统计分析。结果 24例患者双侧纯音听阈全部≤25dBHL,双侧无显著差异;DPOAE各频率检出率及幅值双侧无显著性差异;ABR结果中Ⅰ波波幅在耳鸣侧较健侧降低(t=-2.681,P<0.05),而Ⅲ、Ⅴ波波幅双侧无显著性差异,各波幅比双侧无显著性差异;Ⅰ、Ⅲ、Ⅴ各波潜伏期及波间期双侧无显著性差异。结论 ABR中Ⅰ波波幅下降代表听阈正常的耳鸣患者可能已经存在耳蜗早期变化,对耳鸣早期临床诊断有重要意义。     

不同环境对正常青年人诱发性耳声发射检测的影响

目的 研究正常青年人在隔音和非隔音环境下的瞬态诱发耳声发射（TEOAE）和畸变产物耳声发射（DPOAE）,探讨环境噪声对耳声发射的影响,为临床应用提供参考。方法 应用Capella耳声发射仪对正常听力青年人102耳分别在隔音和非隔音环境下记录DPOAE和TEOAE。结果 两种环境下DPOAE的幅值无显著差异,信噪比（S/N－ratio）、叠加次数、扫描时间有显著性差异;ＴＥＯＡＥ的幅值、信噪比、相关系数（Ｃorr)、叠加次数、扫描时间均有显著性差异;隔音和非隔音环境下的ＤＰＯＡＥ、ＴＥＯＡＥ的通过率有显著性差异。结论 环境噪声（５５－６５dBSpL)对ＤＰＯＡＥ幅值（除０.5kHz外）无明显影响,对ＴＥＯＡＥ有显著影响;在听力筛选时,尤其是在非隔音环境下应用ＤＰＯＡＥ较ＴＥＯＡＥ准确率高;不但具有频率特异性,且可明显降低假阳性率。     

Diplacusis, hearing threshold and otoacoustic emissions in an episode of sudden, unilateral cochlear hearing loss

Limited data are available on the relationship between diplacusis and otoacoustic emissions and sudden hearing threshold changes, and the detail of the mechanism underlying diplacusis is not well understood. Data are presented here from an intensively studied single episode of sudden, non-conductive, mild hearing loss with associated binaural diplacusis, probably due to a viral infection. Treatment with steroids was administered for 1 week. This paper examines the relationships between the hearing loss, diplacusis and otoacoustic emissions during recovery on a day-by-day basis. The hearing thresholds were elevated by up to 20 dB at 4kHz and upwards, and there was an interaural pitch difference up to 12% at 4 and 8 kHz. There was also a frequency-specific change in transient evoked otoacoustic emission (TEOAE) and distortion-product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) level. DPOAE level was reduced by up to 20 dB. with the greatest change seen when a stimulus with a wide stimulus frequency ratio was used. Frequency shifts in the 2f2-fi DPOAE fine structure corresponded to changes in the diplacusis. Complete recovery to previous levels was observed for TEOAE, DPOAE and hearing threshold. The diplacusis recovered to within normal limits after 4 weeks. The frequency shift seen in the DPOAE fine structure did not quite resolve, suggesting a very slight permanent change. The time-courses of TEOAE. diplacusis and hearing threshold were significantly different: most notably, the hearing threshold was stable over a period when the diplacusis deteriorated. This suggests that the cochlear mechanisms involved in diplacusis, hearing threshold and OAE may not be identical.     

Occupational exposure to noise decreases otoacoustic emission efferent suppression

With the discovery of otoacoustic emissions (OAEs), the efferent cochlear system has become accessible for investigation in humans. Recently, it has been suggested that contralateral sound activated OAE efferent suppression may provide an early indication of auditory damage due to exposure to noise. In this study, OAE efferent suppression in normally hearing subjects, occupationally exposed to noise, was compared with respective effects in healthy, non-exposed subjects. The noise-exposed group exhibited higher mean hearing thresholds at frequencies 4, 6 and 10 kHz (p < 0.01) and lower-level transient-evoked otoacoustic emission (TEOAE) and distortion-product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) at a frequency of 4 kHz (not significant). TEOAE efferent suppression was moderately decreased, whereas DPOAE efferent suppression was negligible, in the exposed group compared to non-exposed subjects. The results of the study suggest that OAEs, particularly DPOAE contralateral suppression, are likely to become a valuable method for assessing early hearing damage caused by exposure to noise.     

Otoacoustic emissions in young adults with a history of otitis media

The aim of this study was to investigate otoacoustic emissions in young adults who had a history of otitis media (OM) in childhood and to assess whether a history of OM had an irreversible effect on hearing. We studied 116 cases between 15 and 25 years of age, divided into three groups. Each subject underwent a single examination comprising otoscopy, pure-tone audiometry (PTA), tympanometry, and transient evoked otoacoustic emission (TEOAE) and distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) testing. Subjects in the first and second groups had normal audiometric hearing thresholds and type A tympanograms. The only difference between the first and second group was the presence or absence of a history of OM. The third group consisted of patients diagnosed as having active OM; these patients had poorer hearing thresholds and type B or C tympanograms. After statistical analysis of TEOAE and DPOAE results (one-way analysis of variance test), significant differences were noted between groups. Otoacoustic emission levels were, unsurprisingly, lowest in the third group, as expected. However, the most striking result in the study was that significantly fewer otoacoustic emissions were detected in subjects with a history of OM than in subjects without a history of OM. These findings suggest that OM in childhood may cause minor but irreversible damage to the middle ear or cochlea. Otoacoustic emissions testing can be used to detect this sub-clinical damage.     

言语障碍儿的诱发性耳声发射的检测分析(附31例报告)

目的　研究言语障碍儿 (speechdisorderchildren ,SDC)的诱发性耳声发射 (evokedotoacousticemis sion ,EOAE)的特征 ,评价其对SDC的听力诊断作用。方法　应用Capella耳声发射分析仪对 31例SDC进行畸变产物耳声发射 (distortionproductotoacousticemission ,DPOAE)和瞬态诱发耳声发射 (transientevokedotoacaustice mission ,TEOAE)检测 ,同时每例均进行听性脑干反应 (auditorybrainstemresponse ,ABR)、声导抗测试 ,以ABR检查结果为标准 ,评价EOAE的诊断价值。结果　SDC的EOAE的幅值、信噪比 (S/N ratio)、相关系数 (correlationcoffi cient,Corr)明显低于正常儿 (P <0 .0 1) ,扫描时间、叠加次数明显高于正常儿 (P <0 .0 1) ,其检出率明显低于正常儿 (P <0 .0 1)。以ABR为标准 ,DPOAE和TEOAE的灵敏度同为 95 .5 % ,特异度分别为 80 %和 6 0 % ,准确度分别为 95 .2 %和 93.5 %。结论　SDC的EOAE明显异常于正常儿 ,EOAE对SDC的听力诊断具有较高的应用价值 ,DPOAE的频率特异性对SDC的听力评估、助听器选配可能更有意义。     

Evaluation of the possible effect of magnetic resonance imaging noise on peripheral hearing organ with the otoacoustic emission

PurposeThe aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of noise produced by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) device on hearing by using objective and subjective audiological assessments.MethodsA total of 38 patients between the ages of 18 and 50 without hearing loss, and had performed MRI for brain, head, neck or cervical imaging were included in this prospective clinical study. Pure tone audiometry, speech audiometry, high frequency audiometry, transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) and distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) were performed before and after MRI.ResultsThere was no statistically significant difference in TEOAE, pure tone audiogram, high frequency audiogram and speech audiogram thresholds. In DPOAE, the median value before and after MRI at the frequency of the left ear at 4.0 kHz was 13.6 (8.5–19.9) and 15.7 (8.9–20.7) SNR respectively (p > .05). The median value before MRI at the right ear 4.0 kHz frequency was 14.1 (9.1–20.5) SNR, whereas the median value after MRI was 13.2 (8.8–19.8 SNR (p = 0,03). There was no statistically significant difference in other frequencies in DPOAE.ConclusionsThis is the first objective study that examines the MRI noise on speech audiometry and otoacoustic emission together. However, the effect of MRI noise on hearing pathway is still doubt. Based on the difference at 4 kHz frequency on DPOAE; on-earphones may not sufficiently protect the patients from the MRI noise and this issue should deserve further research.     

Diplacusis,hearing threshold and otoacoustic emissions in an episode of sudden,unilateral cochlear hearing loss

Limited data are available on the relationship between diplacusis and otoacoustic emissions and sudden hearing threshold changes, and the detail of the mechanism underlying diplacusis is not well understood. Data are presented here from an intensively studied single episode of sudden, non-conductive, mild hearing loss with associated binaural diplacusis, probably due to a viral infection. Treatment with steroids was administered for 1 week. This paper examines the relationships between the hearing loss, diplacusis and oto-acoustic emissions during recovery on a day-by-day basis. The hearing thresholds were elevated by up to 20 dB at 4 kHz and upwards, and there was an interaural pitch difference up to 12% at 4 and 8 kHz. There was also a frequency-specific change in transient evoked otoacoustic emission ( TEOAE) and distortion-product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) level. DPOAE level was reduced by up to 20 dB, with the greatest change seen when a stimulus with a wide stimulus frequency ratio was used. Frequency shifts in the 2f2 – f1 DPOAE fine structure corresponded to changes in the diplacusis. Complete recovery to previous levels was observed for TEOAE, DPOAE and hearing threshold. The diplacusis recovered to within normal limits after 4 weeks. The frequency shift seen in the DPOAE fine structure did not quite resolve, suggesting a very slight permanent change. The timecourses of TEOAE, diplacusis and hearing threshold were significantly different; most notably, the hearing threshold was stable over a period when the diplacusis deteriorated. This suggests that the cochlear mechanisms involved in diplacusis, hearing threshold and OAE may not be identical.     

瞬态诱发耳声发射测试结果分析

目的：为取得听功能正常耳瞬态耳声发射测试结果的正常值敏感参数,为临床应用提供诊断依据。方法：采用ＩＬＯ－８８耳动态分析仪对听功能正常的６０耳进行测试。短声声刺激强度为８０ｄＢ ＳＰＬ,刺激方式为非线性模式。结果：对稳定性、Ａ－Ｂ差值、反应幅值、波重复性、频带重复性及信噪比、主频等分别进行分析,得出了正常值。结论：频谱分析、反应幅值及重复性三者综合分析为判断听力正常与否的主要敏感参数。