Summary of the N1-P2 Cortical Auditory Evoked Potential to Estimate the Auditory Threshold in Adults

 

 Buy Article Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

This article introduces the cortical auditory evoked potential (CAEP) and describes the use of the N1-P2 response complex as an objective predictor of hearing threshold in adults and older children. The generators of the CAEP are discussed together with issues of maturation, subject factors, and stimuli and recording parameters for use in the clinic. The basic methods for response identification are outlined and suggestions are made for determining the CAEP threshold. Clinical applications are introduced and the accuracy of the CAEP as an estimator of hearing threshold is given. Finally, a case study provides an example of the technique in the context of medicolegal assessment.

• References

• 1 Hyde M. The N1 response and its applications. Audiol Neurootol 1997; 2 (5) 281-307
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Alberti PW, Hyde ML, Riko K. Exaggerated hearing loss in compensation claimants. J Otolaryngol 1987; 16 (6) 362-366
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Coles RR, Mason SM. The results of cortical electric response audiometry in medico-legal investigations. Br J Audiol 1984; 18 (2) 71-78
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Hone SW, Norman G, Keogh I, Kelly V. The use of cortical evoked response audiometry in the assessment of noise-induced hearing loss. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2003; 128 (2) 257-262
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Prasher D, Mula M, Luxon L. Cortical evoked potential criteria in the objective assessment of auditory threshold: a comparison of noise induced hearing loss with Ménière's disease. J Laryngol Otol 1993; 107 (9) 780-786
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Lightfoot G, Kennedy V. Cortical electric response audiometry hearing threshold estimation: accuracy, speed, and the effects of stimulus presentation features. Ear Hear 2006; 27 (5) 443-456
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Stapells D. Cortical event-related potentials to auditory stimuli. In: Katz J, , ed. Handbook of Clinical Audiology. 5th ed.. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2002
  Google Scholar
• 8 Liégeois-Chauvel C, Musolino A, Badier JM, Marquis P, Chauvel P. Evoked potentials recorded from the auditory cortex in man: evaluation and topography of the middle latency components. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1994; 92 (3) 204-214
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Howard MA, Volkov IO, Mirsky R , et al. Auditory cortex on the human posterior superior temporal gyrus. J Comp Neurol 2000; 416 (1) 79-92
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Sharma A, Dorman MF, Spahr AJ. A sensitive period for the development of the central auditory system in children with cochlear implants: implications for age of implantation. Ear Hear 2002; 23 (6) 532-539
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Pratt H, Lightfoot G. Physiological mechanisms underlying MLRs and cortical EPs. In: Tremblay KL, Burkard RF, , eds. Translational Perspectives in Auditory Neuroscience; Physiological Assessment of Audition. San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing; 2012
  Google Scholar
• 12 Wunderlich JL, Cone-Wesson BK, Shepherd R. Maturation of the cortical auditory evoked potential in infants and young children. Hear Res 2006; 212 (1–2) 185-202
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Mast T, Watson C. Attention and auditory evoked responses to low detectability signals. Percept Psychophys 1968; 4: 237-240
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Keating LW, Ruhm HB. Within average variability of the acoustically evoked response. J Speech Hear Res 1971; 14 (1) 179-188
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 Ornitz EM, Ritvo ER, Carr EM, Panman LM, Walter RD. The variability of the auditory averaged evoked response during sleep and dreaming in children and adults. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1967; 22 (6) 514-524
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Campbell KB, Colrain IM. Event-related potential measures of the inhibition of information processing: II. The sleep onset period. Int J Psychophysiol 2002; 46 (3) 197-214
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 17 Pantev C, Eulitz C, Hampson S, Ross B, Roberts LE. The auditory evoked “off” response: sources and comparison with the “on” and the “sustained” responses. Ear Hear 1996; 17 (3) 255-265
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 18 Jones SJ, Longe O, Vaz Pato M. Auditory evoked potentials to abrupt pitch and timbre change of complex tones: electrophysiological evidence of “streaming”?. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1998; 108 (2) 131-142
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Cody DT, Klass DW. Cortical audiometry. Potential pitfalls in testing. Arch Otolaryngol 1968; 88 (4) 396-406
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Weber BA. Habituation and dishabituation of the averaged auditory evoked response. J Speech Hear Res 1970; 13 (2) 387-394
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 21 McCandless GA, Best L. Summed evoked responses using pure-tone stimuli. J Speech Hear Res 1966; 9 (2) 266-272
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 22 Skinner PH, Jones HC. Effects of signal duration and rise time on the auditory evoked potential. J Speech Hear Res 1968; 11 (2) 301-306
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 23 Bardy F, Van Dun B, Dillon H. Bigger is better: Increasing cortical auditory response amplitude via stimulus spectral complexity. Ear Hear 2015; 36 (6) 677-687
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 24 Ponton C, Eggermont JJ, Khosla D, Kwong B, Don M. Maturation of human central auditory system activity: separating auditory evoked potentials by dipole source modeling. Clin Neurophysiol 2002; 113 (3) 407-420
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 25 Nelson DA, Lassman FM, Hoel RL. The effects of variable-interval and fixed-interval signal presentation schedules on the auditory evoked response. J Speech Hear Res 1969; 12 (1) 199-209
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 26 Davis H, Zerlin S. Acoustic relations of the human vertex potential. J Acoust Soc Am 1966; 39 (1) 109-116
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 27 Rapin I. Practical considerations in using the evoked potential technique in audiometry. Acta Otol 1964; 206: 117-122
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 28 Appleby S. The slow vertex maximal sound evoked response in infants. Acta Otol 1964; 206: 146-152
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 29 Woods DL, Elmasian R. The habituation of event-related potentials to speech sounds and tones. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1986; 65 (6) 447-459
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 30 Rothman HH, Davis H, Hay IS. Slow evoked cortical potentials and temporal features of stimulation. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1970; 29 (3) 225-232
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 31 Butler RA. The influence of spatial separation of sound sources on the auditory evoked response. Neuropsychologia 1972; 10 (2) 219-225
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 32 Butler RA. Effect of changes in stimulus frequency and intensity on habituation of the human vertex potential. J Acoust Soc Am 1968; 44 (4) 945-950
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 33 Picton TW, Goodman WS, Bryce DP. Amplitude of evoked responses to tones of high intensity. Acta Otolaryngol 1970; 70 (2) 77-82
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 34 Ross B, Lütkenhöner B, Pantev C, Hoke M. Frequency-specific threshold determination with the CERAgram method: basic principle and retrospective evaluation of data. Audiol Neurootol 1999; 4 (1) 12-27
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 35 Carter L, Golding M, Dillon H, Seymour J. The detection of infant cortical auditory evoked potentials (CAEPs) using statistical and visual detection techniques. J Am Acad Audiol 2010; 21 (5) 347-356
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 36 Albera R, Canale G, Magnano M , et al. [Relations between pure-tone audiometry and cortical evoked auditory potentials]. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital 1991; 11 (6) 551-562
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 37 Tsu B, Wong LL, Wong EC. Accuracy of cortical evoked response audiometry in the identification of non-organic hearing loss. Int J Audiol 2002; 41 (6) 330-333
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar