Brainstem auditory evoked potential monitoring - When is change in wave V significant?

被引:43
作者
James, ML
Husain, AM
机构
[1] Duke Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Med, Durham, NC 27710 USA
[2] Vet Affairs Med Ctr, Neurodiagnost Ctr, Durham, NC USA
关键词
D O I
10.1212/01.wnl.0000184481.75412.2b
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: The probability of hearing loss during cerebellopontine angle ( CPA) surgery can be reduced by using brainstem auditory evoked potential ( BAEP) intraoperative monitoring ( IOM). A wave V latency prolongation of 1.0 milliseconds or amplitude decrement of greater than 50% is arbitrarily considered the point when damage to hearing occurs. Objective: To determine the accuracy of wave V changes in predicting hearing impairment. Methods: Patients undergoing BAEP IOM for surgery in the CPA region were evaluated. The greatest wave V latency and amplitude change was determined. Patients were divided into four groups depending on degree of change of wave V: Group 1 consisted of minimal change, whereas Group 4 was permanent loss of wave V. The frequency of hearing loss in each group was compared. Results: Data from 156 patients were reviewed. When all patients were analyzed, the frequency of hearing loss was not significantly different between the groups. When patients with CPA tumor were excluded, a significantly higher number of patients in Group 4 had hearing loss. Analysis of the patients with CPA tumor showed no difference in the frequency of hearing loss in any of the groups; even a large number ( 50%) of Group 1 patients had hearing impairment. Conclusions: During brainstem auditory evoked potential intraoperative monitoring, the type of surgery is important when interpreting significance of changes of wave V. For non - cerebellopontine angle tumor surgery, hearing loss occurs usually only with permanent loss of wave V; much smaller changes may be important in cerebellopontine angle tumor surgery.
引用
收藏
页码:1551 / 1555
页数:5
相关论文
共 32 条
  • [1] Microvascular decompression for the treatment of hemifacial spasm retrospective study of a consecutive series of 75 operated patients - Electrophysiologic and anatomical surgical analysis
    Acevedo, JC
    Sindou, M
    Fischer, C
    Vial, C
    [J]. STEREOTACTIC AND FUNCTIONAL NEUROSURGERY, 1997, 68 (1-4) : 260 - 265
  • [2] Angelo R, 1996, NEUROL RES, V18, P528
  • [3] Evaluation of three intraoperative auditory monitoring techniques in acoustic neuroma surgery
    Battista, RA
    Wiet, RJ
    Paauwe, L
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OTOLOGY, 2000, 21 (02) : 244 - 248
  • [4] Hearing preservation in acoustic neuroma surgery
    Browning, S
    Mohr, G
    Dufour, JJ
    Rappaport, JM
    Zeitouni, A
    Provencal, C
    Hernandes, Y
    Surkis, S
    Druker, S
    Davis, NL
    [J]. JOURNAL OF OTOLARYNGOLOGY, 2001, 30 (05) : 307 - 315
  • [5] Colletti V, 1998, AUDIOLOGY, V37, P27
  • [6] ERWIN AC, 2003, CURRENT PRACTICE CLI, P864
  • [7] ERWIN CW, 1995, PRIMER INTRAOPERATIV, P135
  • [8] HEARING PRESERVATION IN UNILATERAL ACOUSTIC NEUROMA SURGERY
    GARDNER, G
    ROBERTSON, JH
    [J]. ANNALS OF OTOLOGY RHINOLOGY AND LARYNGOLOGY, 1988, 97 (01) : 55 - 66
  • [9] INTRA-OPERATIVE MONITORING OF BRAIN-STEM AUDITORY EVOKED-POTENTIALS
    GRUNDY, BL
    JANNETTA, PJ
    PROCOPIO, PT
    LINA, A
    BOSTON, JR
    DOYLE, E
    [J]. JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY, 1982, 57 (05) : 674 - 681
  • [10] Harner SG, 1996, AM J OTOL, V17, P150