Analysis of the efficiency of retrocochlear screening

Kotlarz, Jack P.; Eby, Thomas L.; Borton, Thomas E.

doi:10.1288/00005537-199210000-00004

Cited by 21 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The failure of these two standard ABR measures to detect a significant number of small tumors had been noted and predicted some time ago [Eggermont et al, 1980]. This failure has been repeatedly confi rmed by numerous published studies spanning more than a decade [Telian et al, 1989;Hendrix et al, 1990;Levine et al, 1991;Hashimoto et al, 1991;Kotlarz et al, 1992;Wilson et al, 1992;Kartush et al, 1992;Selesnick and Jackler, 1993;Thomason et al, 1993;Chandrasekhar et al, 1995;Naessens et al, 1996;Zappia et al, 1997;Godey et al, 1998;Robinette et al, 2000;Marangos et al, 2001;Schmidt et al, 2001]. These studies have led to the current assumption that ABRs cannot be used for tumor diagnosis because of the lack of adequate sensitivity to small acoustic tumors (SATs) despite their excellent sensitivity to medium-and large-sized tumors.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%

The Stacked ABR: A Sensitive and Specific Screening Tool for Detecting Small Acoustic Tumors

Don¹,

Kwong²,

Tanaka

et al. 2005

Audiol Neurotol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The failure of standard ABR measures to detect small (≤1 cm) acoustic tumors has led to the use of enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as the standard to screen for small tumors. This study investigates the suitability of the stacked ABR as a sensitive screening alternative to MRI for small acoustic tumors (SATs). The objective of the study was to determine the sensitivity and specificity of the stacked ABR technique for detecting SATs. A total of 54 patients with acoustic tumors identified by MRI that were either ≤1 cm in size or undetected by standard ABR methods, irrespective of size, were studied. A control population of 78 nontumor normal-hearing subjects was also tested. For comparison, two standard ABR measures (IT5 and I-V delay) were also analyzed. The stacked ABR demonstrated 95% sensitivity and 88% specificity; 100% sensitivity was obtained at 50% specificity. Standard ABR measures were much poorer in detecting these tumors. In conclusion, the stacked ABR can be used as a sensitive, widely-available, cost-effective, and comfortable tool for screening SATs.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%

The Stacked ABR: A Sensitive and Specific Screening Tool for Detecting Small Acoustic Tumors

Don¹,

Kwong²,

Tanaka

et al. 2005

Audiol Neurotol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indeed, the ABR is a well known cost-effective test that is routinely used in clinical practice as an objective diagnostic measure for determining the presence of hearing loss in infants, young children and patients that are difficult to test behaviorally. More so, the ABR is an important clinical tool for identifying the presence of retrocochlear lesions, acoustic neuromas, and vestibular schwannomas (Kotlarz et al, 1992; Rupa et al, 2003). This is achieved by identifying waves I, III, and V peaks and comparing the absolute latency values to normative ranges for each wave.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Auditory Brainstem Responses in Tinnitus: A Review of Who, How, and What?

Milloy

Fournier

Benoît

et al. 2017

Front. Aging Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The auditory brainstem response (ABR) in tinnitus subjects has been extensively investigated over the last decade with the hopes of finding possible abnormalities related to the pathology. Despite this effort, the use of the ABR for tinnitus diagnosis or as an outcome measure is under debate. The present study reviewed published literature on ABR and tinnitus. The authors searched PubMed, MedLine, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL, and identified additional records through manually searching reference lists and gray literature. There were 4,566 articles identified through database searching and 151 additional studies through the manual search (4,717 total): 2,128 articles were removed as duplicates, and 2,567 records did not meet eligibility criteria. From the final 22 articles that were included, ABR results from 1,240 tinnitus subjects and 664 control subjects were compiled and summarized with a focus on three main areas: the participant characteristics, the methodology used, and the outcome measures of amplitude and/or latency of waves I, III, and V. The results indicate a high level of heterogeneity between the studies for all the assessed areas. Amplitude and latency differences between tinnitus and controls were not consistent between studies. Nevertheless, the longer latency and reduced amplitude of wave I for the tinnitus group with normal hearing compared to matched controls was the most consistent finding across studies. These results support the need for greater stratification of the tinnitus population and the importance of a standardized ABR method to make comparisons between studies possible.

show abstract

“…Among the causes of asymmetric sensorineural hearing loss, the rate of AN has been reported to range from 0.3 to 4.6% (16,21,22). Kotlarz (22) considers that ABR is the most efficient and economical screening technique for retrocochlear disease.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Kotlarz (22) considers that ABR is the most efficient and economical screening technique for retrocochlear disease. These low rates would be an incentive to selecting patients who should benefit from MRI.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sensitivity of Auditory Brainstem Response in Acoustic Neuroma Screening

Godey

Morandi²,

Beust³

et al. 1998

Acta Oto-Laryngologica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Auditory brainstem response (ABR) is the reference screening technique for acoustic neuromas, but because of a few false negatives and the increasing performance of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), its role as the standard method has been questioned. We assessed sensitivity of screening tests in 89 patients with surgically proven acoustic neuromas. Sensitivity of ABR was 92%; 94% for extracanalicular neuromas and 77% for intracanalicular neuromas. For stapedius reflex (SR), sensitivity was 84% and for caloric vestibular response (CVR) 86%. The combined sensitivity of ABR + SR was 97% and of ABR + RS + CVR 98%. For false negatives, the greatest diameter including the intracanalicular portion was always less than 18 mm, with a mean of 15 mm, and none of these tumours reached the brainstem. For patients with unilateral cochleo-vestibular deficit, we propose ABR and SR as first-line screening tests. These tests are repeated at 6 months and at 1 year in the case of normal results. MRI is ordered for patients whose auditory threshold is too low and for those whose ABR or SR results favour retrocochlear disease.

show abstract

Analysis of the efficiency of retrocochlear screening

Cited by 21 publications

References 11 publications

The Stacked ABR: A Sensitive and Specific Screening Tool for Detecting Small Acoustic Tumors

The Stacked ABR: A Sensitive and Specific Screening Tool for Detecting Small Acoustic Tumors

Auditory Brainstem Responses in Tinnitus: A Review of Who, How, and What?

Sensitivity of Auditory Brainstem Response in Acoustic Neuroma Screening

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About