07 December 2015 : Clinical Research
Comparison of 3 ABR Methods for Diagnosis of Retrocochlear Hearing Impairment
Krzysztof M. KochanekADF, Lech ŚliwaCDEF, Marek GołębiowskiD, Adam PiłkaBC, Henryk SkarżyńskiGDOI: 10.12659/MSM.895291
Med Sci Monit 2015; 21:3814-3824
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of methods for screening for retrocochlear pathologies based on auditory evoked brainstem responses (ABRs). The study compared the sensitivity, specificity, and effectiveness of these 3 techniques.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The methods were: (i) standard ABR utilizing click-evoked responses, (ii) stacked ABR based on derived-band responses, and (iii) ABRs evoked by tone-pips (ABR TP). The methods were tested on patients with retrocochlear pathologies confirmed by MRI-Gd, normal-hearing subjects, and patients with cochlear hearing loss. The system and software used in the tests was NavPro AEP v.6.2.0 (BioLogic – Natus). Prior to testing, all subjects were given comprehensive audiologic and otologic examinations, including MR imaging. Sensitivity and specificity functions and predictive values of methods were determined.
RESULTS: The stacked ABR method as realized in the NavPro system exhibited high sensitivity but specificity was very low, due to the high variability of stacked ABR amplitudes. The standard ABR method had good specificity, but low sensitivity in cases of small tumors (below 1 cm in diameter). Best sensitivity and specificity was obtained with the ABR TP method.
CONCLUSIONS: The stacked ABR method allows small acoustic tumors to be detected, but produces high percentage of false positive results. The ABR TP method offers good sensitivity and specificity, and relatively high predictive value. The best option would be to use a two-stage screening, consisting of a standard ABR in the first stage and an ABR TP test in the second.
Keywords: Hearing Disorders - diagnosis, Cochlea - physiopathology, Sensitivity and Specificity
Editorial
01 March 2024 : Editorial
Editorial: First Regulatory Approvals for CRISPR-Cas9 Therapeutic Gene Editing for Sickle Cell Disease and Transfusion-Dependent β-ThalassemiaDOI: 10.12659/MSM.944204
Med Sci Monit 2024; 30:e944204
In Press
18 Mar 2024 : Clinical Research
Sexual Dysfunction in Women After Tibial Fracture: A Retrospective Comparative StudyMed Sci Monit In Press; DOI: 10.12659/MSM.944136
21 Feb 2024 : Clinical Research
Potential Value of HSP90α in Prognosis of Triple-Negative Breast CancerMed Sci Monit In Press; DOI: 10.12659/MSM.943049
22 Feb 2024 : Review article
Differentiation of Native Vertebral Osteomyelitis: A Comprehensive Review of Imaging Techniques and Future ...Med Sci Monit In Press; DOI: 10.12659/MSM.943168
23 Feb 2024 : Clinical Research
A Study of 60 Patients with Low Back Pain to Compare Outcomes Following Magnetotherapy, Ultrasound, Laser, ...Med Sci Monit In Press; DOI: 10.12659/MSM.943732
Most Viewed Current Articles
16 May 2023 : Clinical Research
Electrophysiological Testing for an Auditory Processing Disorder and Reading Performance in 54 School Stude...DOI :10.12659/MSM.940387
Med Sci Monit 2023; 29:e940387
17 Jan 2024 : Review article
Vaccination Guidelines for Pregnant Women: Addressing COVID-19 and the Omicron VariantDOI :10.12659/MSM.942799
Med Sci Monit 2024; 30:e942799
14 Dec 2022 : Clinical Research
Prevalence and Variability of Allergen-Specific Immunoglobulin E in Patients with Elevated Tryptase LevelsDOI :10.12659/MSM.937990
Med Sci Monit 2022; 28:e937990
01 Jan 2022 : Editorial
Editorial: Current Status of Oral Antiviral Drug Treatments for SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Non-Hospitalized Pa...DOI :10.12659/MSM.935952
Med Sci Monit 2022; 28:e935952