Hidden Hearing Loss? No Effect of Common Recreational Noise Exposure on Cochlear Nerve Response Amplitude in Humans.
Hidden Hearing Loss? No Effect of Common Recreational Noise Exposure on Cochlear Nerve Response Amplitude in Humans.
复制标题
DOI：
10.3389/fnins.2017.00465
复制
发表时间：
2017
影响因子：
4.3
通讯作者：
Le Prell CG
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Grinn SK;Wiseman KB;Baker JA;Le Prell CG
本研究测试了噪声暴露和听觉缺陷之间的假设关系。回顾性评估噪声暴露史与听力测试组合表现之间的潜在关联，以及前瞻性评估新的娱乐性噪声暴露后表现的潜在变化。研究方法：32名参加者（13 M，19 F）听力正常（25-dB HL或更好，0.25-8 kHz）被要求参加3次暴露前和暴露后会议，包括：耳镜检查，鼓室导抗测定，畸变产物耳声发射（DPOAEs）（f2频率1-8 kHz），纯音测听（0.25-8 kHz）、噪声中文字（WIN）测试和70、80和90 dB nHL（喀喇音和2-4 kHz短纯音）下的耳蜗电图（eCochG）测量。第一个阶段用于收集基线数据，第二个阶段在大声娱乐活动后的第二天收集，第三个阶段在1周后收集。在32名参与者中，有26人完成了所有3次培训。结果：回顾性分析未发现噪声暴露史与任何听觉缺陷之间存在统计学显著关系。在新暴露后的第二天，噪声“剂量”和WIN性能之间存在统计学显著相关性，并且在4 dB信号-混串音比范围内。与此相反，有没有统计学上的显着相关性噪声剂量和变化的阈值，DPOAE振幅，或AP振幅后的第二天，新的噪声暴露。其他分析显示，TTS和DPOAE振幅在6 kHz的统计学显着的关系，暂时降低DPOAE振幅观察到增加TTS。结论：没有证据表明听觉缺陷作为以前的噪声暴露史的函数，并且在新的娱乐性噪声暴露后，听力测定，电生理或功能测量没有永久性变化。在暴露后第二天，很少有参与者患有TTS-选择的测试时间与先前的动物研究一致。观察到的最大TTS约为20 dB。观察到的小TTS模式表明，普通娱乐性噪声暴露引起突触病的风险很小，因此我们不应期望观察到诱发电位的变化。本研究中未观察到此类变化。这些数据并不支持普通的娱乐性噪音暴露可能导致“隐性听力损失”的建议。
This study tested hypothesized relationships between noise exposure and auditory deficits. Both retrospective assessment of potential associations between noise exposure history and performance on an audiologic test battery and prospective assessment of potential changes in performance after new recreational noise exposure were completed. Methods: 32 participants (13M, 19F) with normal hearing (25-dB HL or better, 0.25–8 kHz) were asked to participate in 3 pre- and post-exposure sessions including: otoscopy, tympanometry, distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) (f2 frequencies 1–8 kHz), pure-tone audiometry (0.25–8 kHz), Words-in-Noise (WIN) test, and electrocochleography (eCochG) measurements at 70, 80, and 90-dB nHL (click and 2–4 kHz tone-bursts). The first session was used to collect baseline data, the second session was collected the day after a loud recreational event, and the third session was collected 1-week later. Of the 32 participants, 26 completed all 3 sessions. Results: The retrospective analysis did not reveal statistically significant relationships between noise exposure history and any auditory deficits. The day after new exposure, there was a statistically significant correlation between noise “dose” and WIN performance overall, and within the 4-dB signal-to-babble ratio. In contrast, there were no statistically significant correlations between noise dose and changes in threshold, DPOAE amplitude, or AP amplitude the day after new noise exposure. Additional analyses revealed a statistically significant relationship between TTS and DPOAE amplitude at 6 kHz, with temporarily decreased DPOAE amplitude observed with increasing TTS. Conclusions: There was no evidence of auditory deficits as a function of previous noise exposure history, and no permanent changes in audiometric, electrophysiologic, or functional measures after new recreational noise exposure. There were very few participants with TTS the day after exposure - a test time selected to be consistent with previous animal studies. The largest observed TTS was approximately 20-dB. The observed pattern of small TTS suggests little risk of synaptopathy from common recreational noise exposure, and that we should not expect to observe changes in evoked potentials for this reason. No such changes were observed in this study. These data do not support suggestions that common, recreational noise exposure is likely to result in “hidden hearing loss”.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
3.7
作者：
Jensen JB;Lysaght AC;Liberman MC;Qvortrup K;Stankovic KM
通讯作者：
Stankovic KM
影响因子：
2.4
作者：
Brungart, Douglas S.;Sheffield, Benjamin M.;Kubli, Lina R.
通讯作者：
Kubli, Lina R.
影响因子：
2.1
作者：
Derebery, M. Jennifer;Vermiglio, Andrew;Holguin, Kirsten
通讯作者：
Holguin, Kirsten
影响因子：
1.2
作者：
Bramhall, Naomi;Ong, Bonnie;Parker, Mark
通讯作者：
Parker, Mark
影响因子：
4.3
作者：
Hoben R;Easow G;Pevzner S;Parker MA
通讯作者：
Parker MA