한국임상수의학회지 (Journal of Veterinary Clinics)

  • 제37권3호
  • /
  • Pages.123-129
  • /
  • 2020
  • /
  • 1598-298X(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2384-0749(eISSN)
한국임상수의학회 (The Korean Society of Veterinary Clinics)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Comparative Study of Insert Earphones and Circumaural Earphones in the Brainstem Auditory-Evoked Response Test of Dogs

  • Kim, Sang-Woo (Institute of Animal Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Gyeongsang National University) ;
  • Song, Joong-Hyun (Institute of Animal Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Gyeongsang National University) ;
  • An, Su-Jin (Institute of Animal Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Gyeongsang National University) ;
  • Yu, Do-Hyeon (Institute of Animal Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Gyeongsang National University) ;
  • Kim, Young Joo (College of Veterinary Medicine, Western University of Health Sciences) ;
  • Han, Donghyun (Section of Heart Clinic, Choi youngmin Animal Medical Center) ;
  • Jung, Dong-In (Institute of Animal Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Gyeongsang National University)
  • 투고 : 2020.03.22
  • 심사 : 2020.06.08
  • 발행 : 2020.06.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

We aimed to investigate the differences in the efficacy of insert and circumaural earphones when performing the brainstem auditory evoked response (BAER) test with dogs. Hearing loss may occur congenitally or secondarily in dogs. The BAER test, unlike the classical ethological method, is the most reliable diagnostic tool to assess canine auditory function. Furthermore, there are certain advantages of using insert earphones rather than the standard, circumaural earphones. We subjected eight dogs to the BAER test with insert earphones and circumaural earphones. The result revealed that the latency of waves was delayed with an insert earphone. The inter-peak latency did not show any significant differences between the two transducers, and the threshold was higher when using an insert earphone. Moreover, the circumaural headphones produced a greater degree of crossover effect than the insert earphones, and this cross-over effect could affect the outcomes of the BAER test. Considering these results, we concluded that insert earphones may be more appropriate when performing the canine BAER test.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Armasu M, Musteata M, Stanciu GD, Balan C, Solcan G. The importance of brainstem auditory evoked response in dogs with congenital hydrocephalus. Bulletin UASVM Vet Med 2014; 71: 305-312.
  2. Armasu M, Musteata M, Stanciu GD, Mocanu D, Solcan G. Brainstem auditory evoked responses in healthy Argentine Mastiffdogs recorded with surface electrodes. Arq Bras Med Vet e Zootec 2015; 67: 1457-1460. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-4162-8379
  3. Beauchaine KA, Kaminski JR, Gorga MP. Comparison of beyer dt48 and etymotic insert earphones: Auditory brain stem response measurements. Ear Hear 1987; 8: 292-297. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003446-198710000-00007
  4. Bodenhamer RD, Hunter JF, Luttgen PJ. Brain stem auditoryevoked responses in the dog. Am J Vet Res 1985; 46: 1787-92.
  5. Clark JL, Roeaer RJ. Three studies comparing performance of the ER-3A tubephone with the TDH-50P earphone. Ear Hear 1988; 9: 268-274. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003446-198810000-00007
  6. Clemis JD, Ballad WJ, Killion MC. Clinical use of an insert earphone. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1986; 95: 520-524. https://doi.org/10.1177/000348948609500515
  7. Holliday TA, Te Selle ME. Brain stem auditory-evoked potentials of dogs: wave forms and effects of recording electrode positions. Am J Vet Res 1985; 46: 845-851.
  8. Killion MC. Insert earphones for audiometry. J Acoust Soc Am 1989; 95: 520-524.
  9. Marshall AE. Brain stem auditory-evoked response of the nonanesthetized dog. Am J Vet Res 1985; 46: 966-973.
  10. Meij BP, Venker-van Haagen AJ, van den Brom WE. Relationship between latency of brainstem auditory-evoked potentials and head size in dogs. Vet Q 1992; 14: 121-126. https://doi.org/10.1080/01652176.1992.9694347
  11. Myers LJ, Redding RW, Wilson S. Reference values of the brainstem auditory evoked response of methoxyflurane anesthetized and unanesthetized dogs. Vet Res Commun 1985; 9: 289-294. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02215152
  12. Paterson S. Brainstem auditory evoked responses in 37 dogs with otitis media before and after topical therapy. J Small Anim Pract 2018; 59: 10-15. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsap.12711
  13. Plonek M, Nicpon J, Kubiak K, Wrzosek M. A comparison of the brainstem auditory evoked response in healthy ears of unilaterally deaf dogs and bilaterally hearing dogs. Vet Res Commun 2017; 41: 23-31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11259-016-9668-3
  14. Plsonek M, Giza E, Niedzwiedz A, Kubiak K, Nicpon J, Wrzosek M. Evaluation of the occurrence of canine congenital sensorineural deafness in puppies of predisposed dog breeds using the brainstem auditory evoked response. Acta Vet Hung 2016; 64: 425-435. https://doi.org/10.1556/004.2016.040
  15. Plourde G. Auditory evoked potentials. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol 2006; 20: 129-139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpa.2005.07.012
  16. Pomianowski A, Adamiak Z. Bone-conducted brainstem auditory evoked response in a dog with total bilateral ear canal ablation: A case report. Vet Med (Praha) 2010; 55: 39-41. https://doi.org/10.17221/20/2010-vetmed
  17. Scheifele PM, Clark JG. Electrodiagnostic Evaluation of Auditory Function in the Dog. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 2012; 42: 1241-1257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cvsm.2012.08.012
  18. Sims MH, Moore RE. Auditory-evoked response in the clinically normal dog: Early latency components. Am J Vet Res 1984; 45: 2019-2027.
  19. Sims MH. Electrodiagnostic Evaluation of Auditory Function. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 1988; 18: 913-944. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0195-5616(88)50090-6
  20. Sklare DA, Denenberg LJ. Interaural attenuation for tubephone insert earphones. Ear Hear 1987; 8: 298-300. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003446-198710000-00008
  21. Stanciu GD, Musteata M, Armasu M, Solcan G. Evaluation of central vestibular syndrome in dogs using brainstem auditory evoked responses recorded with surface electrodes. Arq Bras Med Vet e Zootec 2016; 68: 1422-1430. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-4162-8820
  22. Steiss JE, Cox NR, Hathcock JT. Brain Stem auditory-evoked response abnormalities in 14 dogs with confirmed central nervous system lesions. J Vet Intern Med 1994; 8: 293-298. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-1676.1994.tb03236.x
  23. Strain GM, Kearney MT, Gignac IJ, Levesque DC, Nelson HJ, Tedford BL. Brainstem auditory-evoked potential assessment of congenital deafness in dalmatians: associations with phenotypic markers. J Vet Intern Med 1992; 6: 175-182. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-1676.1992.tb00333.x
  24. Strain GM. Deafness prevalence and pigmentation and gender associations in dog breeds at risk. Vet J 2004; 167: 23-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1090-0233(03)00104-7
  25. Van Campen LE, Sammeth CA, Peek BF. Interaural attenuation using etymotic ER-3A insert earphones in auditory brain stem response testing. Ear Hear 1990; 11: 66-69. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003446-199002000-00013
  26. Van Campen LE, Sammeth CA, Hall JW, Peek BF. Comparison of Etymotic insert and TDH supra-aural earphones in auditory brainstem response measurement. J Am Acad Audiol 1992; 3: 315-323.
  27. Venker-van Haagen AJ, Siemelink RJ, Smoorenburg GF. Auditory brainstem responses in the normal beagle. Vet Q 1989; 11: 129-137. https://doi.org/10.1080/01652176.1989.9694211
  28. Weber BA. Pitfalls in auditory brain stem response audiometry. Ear Hear 1983; 4: 179-184. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003446-198307000-00001
  29. Wilson WJ, Mills PC. Brainstem auditory-evoked response in dogs. Am J Vet Res 2005; 66: 2177-2186. https://doi.org/10.2460/ajvr.2005.66.2177