Evidence for independent peripheral and central age‐related hearing impairment

Abstract

Deleterious age‐related changes in the central auditory nervous system have been referred to as central age‐related hearing impairment (ARHI) or central presbycusis. Central ARHI is often assumed to be the consequence of peripheral ARHI. However, it is possible that certain aspects of central ARHI are independent from peripheral ARHI. A confirmation of this possibility could lead to significant improvements in current rehabilitation practices. The major difficulty in addressing this issue arises from confounding factors, such as other age‐related changes in both the cochlea and central non‐auditory brain structures. Because gap detection is a common measure of central auditory temporal processing, and gap detection thresholds are less influenced by changes in other brain functions such as learning and memory, we investigated the potential relationship between age‐related peripheral hearing loss (i.e., audiograms) and age‐related changes in gap detection. Consistent with previous studies, a significant difference was found for gap detection thresholds between young and older adults. However, among older adults, no significant associations were observed between gap detection ability and several other independent variables including the pure tone audiogram average, the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale‐Vocabulary score, gender, and age. Statistical analyses showed little or no contributions from these independent variables to gap detection thresholds. Thus, our data indicate that age‐related decline in central temporal processing is largely independent of peripheral ARHI.

Changes in the peripheral and central auditory performance in the elderly—A cross‐sectional study

“…In summary, results of our CADP test battery proved differential aging of various parts and functional aspects of the central auditory system. They, in general, provided further evidence for an independent central ARHL component not solely related to peripheral hearing loss, as recently postulated by Bao et al (2020). The more pronounced peripheral hearing loss in the NHE group compared with the HC group made it difficult to attribute the poorer central discrimination performance of the NHE group to aging alone.…”

Impact of Aging and the Electrode-to-Neural Interface on Temporal Processing Ability in Cochlear-Implant Users: Gap Detection Thresholds

“…These studies found that gap detection ability declined with advancing age independent from peripheral hearing status ( Schneider et al., 1994 ; Snell, 1997 ). Because older listeners display reduced temporal resolution beyond what can be explained by age-related changes to the periphery, gap detection ability is often argued to be a measure of central auditory processes independent of peripheral status ( Bao et al., 2020 ). One main purpose of this study was to examine central versus peripheral contributions to temporal processing using CI users, who could also experience age-related declines in auditory temporal acuity that are seen in older acoustic-hearing individuals.…”

Effect of Chronological Age on Pulse Rate Discrimination in Adult Cochlear-Implant Users

“…The aging effects on temporal processing (e.g., temporal pulse rate discrimination) are likely to be associated with age-related changes at peripheral (Sergeyenko et al, 2013) and central processing (Anderson et al, 2020;Clinard et al, 2010;Gaskins et al, 2019). However, the relative contributions of those factors are still debated (Bao et al, 2020;Humes et al, 2012). These converging findings regarding age-related changes in temporal processing in CI users may be the result of a common mechanism (Hopkins & Moore, 2011).…”

“…Age-related deficits in temporal processing for CI users likely involve both peripheral and central mechanisms. However, their relative contributions are still debated (Bao et al, 2020;Humes et al, 2012). CIs allow us to mostly bypass cochlear effects (e.g., the distortion introduced by damaged or missing inner and outer hair cells, reduced responses due to age-related reductions in the endocochlear potential) and to characterize some of the peripheral contributions with relative ease (Turner et al, 2010).…”