ABR Indices Sensitivity, Specificity, and Tumor Size Research Article
Research Article  |   March 01, 1996
ABR Indices
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Christopher D. Bauch, PhD
    Section of Audiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905
  • Wayne O. Olsen
    Section of Audiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905
  • Angela F. Pool
    Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL
  • Portions of this paper were presented at the November 1991 convention of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association in Atlanta, GA.
    Portions of this paper were presented at the November 1991 convention of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association in Atlanta, GA.×
Article Information
Hearing Disorders / Research Articles
Research Article   |   March 01, 1996
ABR Indices
American Journal of Audiology, March 1996, Vol. 5, 97-104. doi:10.1044/1059-0889.0501.97
History: Received July 18, 1994 , Accepted May 1, 1995
 
American Journal of Audiology, March 1996, Vol. 5, 97-104. doi:10.1044/1059-0889.0501.97
History: Received July 18, 1994; Accepted May 1, 1995

ABR absolute latencies and interpeak intervals were reviewed for 684 non-tumor ears and 75 eighth-nerve tumor ears having various degrees of high frequency hearing loss. For non-tumor ears, the percentage of abnormal absolute latencies for waves I, III, and V increased rather systematically as hearing loss increased, whereas absolute latencies for eighth-nerve tumor ears were largely abnormal regardless of hearing loss. Interpeak intervals were normal for most of the non-tumor ears, but the I–III and I–V intervals were abnormal for most of the tumor ears. The most sensitive index for otoneurologic assessment was a combination of abnormal wave V interaural latency differences or I–V interpeak interval, and the most specific criterion was the I–V interpeak interval. Tumor size influenced sensitivity of most ABR indices.

Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire American Journal of Audiology content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access