Assessment of non-invasive electrocochleography

Mason, S. M.; Singh, C. B.; Brown, Pierre-Antoine

doi:10.1017/s0022215100089477

Cited by 27 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Almost all studies use click stimuli; however, tone bursts are additionally applied in three-quarters of the TT-ECOG publications reviewed (10,11,13,(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24) and only in one third of the ET-ECOG reports (21,23,(25)(26)(27)(28)(29)(30).…”

Section: Stimulusmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Review of Electrocochleography: Instrumentation Settings and Meta-analysis of Criteria for Diagnosis of Endolymphatic Hydrops

Wuyts

Heyning

Spaendonck

et al. 1997

Acta Oto-Laryngologica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reviews the literature on instrumentation settings used for transtympanic (TT-ECOG) and extratympanic electrocochleography ( ET-ECOG). There is wide variation with regard to the applied stimulus, the settings and interpretation of ECOG results. For most physicians, the presence of endolymphatic hydrops is indicated either by the summating/action potential (SP/AP) ratio for click stimuli or the SP amplitude after tone bursts. Different upper limits have been proposed to discriminate hydropic from non-hydropic ears. Based upon a meta-analysis and classification criteria obtained from multivariate statistics, the authors propose that an SP/AP ratio with click stimulation > 0.35 using TT-ECOG, or >0.42 using ET-ECOG, is indicative of hydrops. With tone burst stimulation set at a repetition rate of 30-40 stimuli per second, a SP of < -2 y V using TT-ECOG for at least one frequency within the range 0.5-8.0 kHz is considered pathologic.

show abstract

Section: Stimulusmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Review of Electrocochleography: Instrumentation Settings and Meta-analysis of Criteria for Diagnosis of Endolymphatic Hydrops

Wuyts

Heyning

Spaendonck

et al. 1997

Acta Oto-Laryngologica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Presently, we are using a slightly modified version of it, which we found to be the easiest to handle. Other authors who reported results with ear canal surface electrodes are Humphries et al [14], Mori et al [15,16] and Mason et al [17]. Coats [4] and Mori et al [16] demonstrated the reliable registration of the summating potential.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electrocochleography: Using Extratympanic or Transtympanic Methods?

Probst¹

1983

ORL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The advantages and disadvantages of the transtympanic and extratympanic methods for recording electrocochleographic potentials (ECochG) are discussed. Our extratympanic method (adapted from Coats) and some results are presented. We conclude that for broad clinical application an ear canal surface electrode is the method of choice for recording ECochG, unless the primary question is one of threshold measurement. If the registration of brainstem potentials from the vertex does not show a potential I, we recommend simultaneous recording of ECochG by an extratympanic method with earphones.

show abstract

“…The brainstem response was recorded differentially from the C z * and the ipsilateral earlobe, positivity at the vertex being an upward deflection on the response. The electrocochleography was recorded from a surface electrode positioned close to the eardrum in the ear canal and referenced to the contralateral earlobe as described previously (Mason et al, 1980;Singh et al, 1980). The ipsilateral earlobe electrode was occasionally used as the reference electrode to eliminate brainstem interference in the AP recording.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is an invasive technique and considerably limits its use in this particular situation. A non-invasive technique of recording the auditory nerve action potential, extra-tympanic electrocochleography can be more readily employed (Coats and Martin, 1977;Coats, 1978;Mason et al, 1980;Singh et al, 1980). We have made simultaneous recordings of the brainstem evoked response and electrocochleogram to a click stimulus in both normal subjects and clinical cases with suspected auditory nerve and brainstem pathology.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%