Dataset Information

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

ABSTRACT: 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.

SUBMITTER: Milloy V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5519563 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

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

Milloy Victoria V Fournier Philippe P Benoit Daniel D Noreña Arnaud A Koravand Amineh A

Frontiers in aging neuroscience 20170721

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 referenc ...[more]

PMID: 28785218

Similar Datasets

Project description:Introduction Accumulating evidence suggests a role of the brainstem in tinnitus generation and modulation. Several studies in chronic tinnitus patients have reported latency and amplitude changes of the different peaks of the auditory brainstem response, possibly reflecting neural changes or altered activity. The aim of the systematic review was to assess if alterations within the brainstem of chronic tinnitus patients are reflected in short- and middle-latency auditory evoked potentials (AEPs). Methods A systematic review was performed and reported according to the PRISMA guidelines. Studies evaluating short- and middle-latency AEPs in tinnitus patients and controls were included. Two independent reviewers conducted the study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment. Meta-analysis was performed using a multivariate meta-analytic model. Results Twenty-seven cross-sectional studies were included. Multivariate meta-analysis revealed that in tinnitus patients with normal hearing, significantly longer latencies of auditory brainstem response (ABR) waves I (SMD = 0.66 ms, p < 0.001), III (SMD = 0.43 ms, p < 0.001), and V (SMD = 0.47 ms, p < 0.01) are present. The results regarding possible changes in middle-latency responses (MLRs) and frequency-following responses (FFRs) were inconclusive. Discussion The discovered changes in short-latency AEPs reflect alterations at brainstem level in tinnitus patients. More specifically, the prolonged ABR latencies could possibly be explained by high frequency sensorineural hearing loss, or other modulating factors such as cochlear synaptopathy or somatosensory tinnitus generators. The question whether middle-latency AEP changes, representing subcortical level of the auditory pathway, are present in tinnitus still remains unanswered. Future studies should identify and correctly deal with confounding factors, such as age, gender and the presence of somatosensory tinnitus components. Systematic review registration https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021243687, PROSPERO [CRD42021243687].

Project description:Behavior does not differentiate ASD risk prior to 12 months of age, but biomarkers may inform risk before symptoms emerge. Click-evoked auditory brainstem responses (ABRs) may be worth consideration due to their measurement properties (noninvasiveness; reliability) and conceptual features (well-characterized neural generators), but participant characteristics and assessment protocols vary considerably across studies. Our goal is to perform a meta-analysis of the association between ABRs and ASD. Following an electronic database search (PubMed, Medline, PsycInfo, PsycArticles), we included papers that were written in English, included ASD and typically-developing (TD) groups, and reported the information needed to calculate standardized mean differences (Hedges's g) for at least one ABR latency component (I, III, V, I-III, III-V, I-V). We weighted and averaged effect sizes across conditions and subsets of participants to yield one estimate per component per study. We then performed random-effects regressions to generate component-specific estimates. ASD was associated with longer ABR latencies for Waves III (g?=?0.5, 95% CI 0.1, 0.9), V (g?=?0.7, 95% CI 0.3, 1.1), I-III (g?=?0.7, 95% CI 0.2, 1.2), and I-V (g?=?0.6, 95% CI 0.2, 1.0). All components showed significant heterogeneity. Associations were strongest among participants ?8 years of age and those without middle ear abnormalities or elevated auditory thresholds. In sum, associations between ABRs and ASD are medium-to-large in size, but exhibit heterogeneity. Identifying sources of heterogeneity is challenging, however, due to power limitations and co-occurrence of sample/design characteristics across studies. Research addressing the above limitations is crucial to determining the etiologic and/or prognostic value of ABRs for ASD. Autism Res 2018, 11: 916-927. © 2018 International Society for Autism Research, Wiley Periodicals, Inc. LAY SUMMARY:Auditory brainstem responses (ABR) may be associated with ASD, but participant characteristics and assessment protocols vary considerably across individual studies. Our goal is to combine the results across these studies to facilitate clarity on the topic. Doing so represents a first step in evaluating whether ABRs yield potential for informing the etiology of ASD risk and/or ASD symptom profiles.

Project description:IntroductionTinnitus may have a very severe impact on the quality of life. Unfortunately, for many patients, a satisfactory treatment modality is lacking. The auditory brainstem implant (ABI) was originally indicated for hearing restoration in patients with non-functional cochlear nerves, for example, in neurofibromatosis type II. In analogy to a cochlear implant (CI), it has been demonstrated that an ABI may reduce tinnitus as a beneficial side effect. For tinnitus treatment, an ABI may have an advantage over a CI, as cochlear implantation can harm inner ear structures due to its invasiveness, while an ABI is presumed to not damage anatomical structures. This is the first study to implant an ABI to investigate its effect on intractable tinnitus.Methods and analysisIn this pilot study, 10 adults having incapacitating unilateral intractable tinnitus and ipsilateral severe hearing loss will have an ABI implanted. The ABI is switched on 6 weeks after implantation, followed by several fitting sessions aimed at finding an optimal stimulation strategy. The primary outcome will be the change in Tinnitus Functioning Index. Secondary outcomes will be tinnitus burden and quality of life (using Tinnitus Handicap Inventory and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale questionnaires), tinnitus characteristics (using Visual Analogue Scale, a tinnitus analysis), safety, audiometric and vestibular function. The end point is set at 1 year after implantation. Follow-up will continue until 5 years after implantation.Ethics and disseminationThe protocol was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board of the University Medical Centre Groningen, The Netherlands (METc 2015/479). The trial is registered at www.clinicialtrials.gov and will be updated if amendments are made. Results of this study will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and at scientific conferences.Trial registration numberNCT02630589.Trial statusInclusion of first patient in November 2017. Data collection is in progress. Trial is open for further inclusion. The trial ends at 5 years after inclusion of the last patient.

Dataset Information

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

Publications

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

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets