Envelope following responses predict speech-in-noise performance in normal-hearing listeners.
auditory nerve
cochlea
cochlear synaptopathy
envelope following responses
hearing in noise
Journal
Journal of neurophysiology
ISSN: 1522-1598
Titre abrégé: J Neurophysiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0375404
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 04 2021
01 04 2021
Historique:
pubmed:
4
3
2021
medline:
24
11
2021
entrez:
3
3
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Permanent threshold elevation after noise exposure or aging is caused by loss of sensory cells; however, animal studies show that hair cell loss is often preceded by degeneration of the synapses between sensory cells and auditory nerve fibers. Silencing these neurons is likely to degrade auditory processing and may contribute to difficulties understanding speech in noisy backgrounds. Reduction of suprathreshold ABR amplitudes can be used to quantify synaptopathy in inbred mice. However, ABR amplitudes are highly variable in humans, and thus more challenging to use. Since noise-induced neuropathy preferentially targets fibers with high thresholds and low spontaneous rate and because phase locking to temporal envelopes is particularly strong in these fibers, measuring envelope following responses (EFRs) might be a more robust measure of cochlear synaptopathy. A recent auditory model further suggests that modulation of carrier tones with rectangular envelopes should be less sensitive to cochlear amplifier dysfunction and, therefore, a better metric of cochlear neural damage than sinusoidal amplitude modulation. In this study, we measure performance scores on a variety of difficult word-recognition tasks among listeners with normal audiograms and assess correlations with EFR magnitudes to rectangular versus sinusoidal modulation. Higher harmonics of EFR magnitudes evoked by a rectangular-envelope stimulus were significantly correlated with word scores, whereas those evoked by sinusoidally modulated tones did not. These results support previous reports that individual differences in synaptopathy may be a source of speech recognition variability despite the presence of normal thresholds at standard audiometric frequencies.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33656936
doi: 10.1152/jn.00620.2020
pmc: PMC8282226
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1213-1222Subventions
Organisme : NIDCD NIH HHS
ID : P50 DC015857
Pays : United States
Références
Ear Hear. 2021 Jul-Aug 01;42(4):782-792
pubmed: 33259444
Ear Hear. 2020 Jan/Feb;41(1):25-38
pubmed: 31584501
J Neurophysiol. 1996 Oct;76(4):2799-803
pubmed: 8899648
J Acoust Soc Am. 1984 Jul;76(1):87-96
pubmed: 6747116
J Acoust Soc Am. 2000 Aug;108(2):723-34
pubmed: 10955639
Ear Hear. 2020 May/Jun;41(3):500-507
pubmed: 31490800
Hear Res. 1995 Nov;91(1-2):19-32
pubmed: 8647720
J Am Acad Audiol. 1994 Jul;5(4):231-5
pubmed: 7949294
J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2021 Feb;22(1):33-49
pubmed: 33078291
Ear Hear. 2019 Nov/Dec;40(6):1267-1279
pubmed: 30882533
Scand Audiol Suppl. 2001;(52):152-5
pubmed: 11318452
J Neurosci. 2018 Aug 8;38(32):7108-7119
pubmed: 29976623
Hear Res. 2015 Dec;330(Pt B):191-9
pubmed: 25769437
Trends Hear. 2017 Jan-Dec;21:2331216517737417
pubmed: 29105620
J Neurophysiol. 2013 Aug;110(3):577-86
pubmed: 23596328
Neuroscience. 2019 May 21;407:53-66
pubmed: 30853540
Hear Res. 2013 Aug;302:113-20
pubmed: 23566980
J Neurophysiol. 2020 Aug 1;124(2):418-431
pubmed: 32639924
J Neurophysiol. 1984 Jun;51(6):1326-44
pubmed: 6737033
J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol. 2016 Jan;29(1):18-24
pubmed: 26251108
Trans Am Acad Ophthalmol Otolaryngol. 1955 Mar-Apr;59(2):147-9
pubmed: 14373749
Neuroscience. 2008 Jun 23;154(2):784-95
pubmed: 18485606
J Neurosci. 2009 Nov 11;29(45):14077-85
pubmed: 19906956
J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2020 Apr;21(2):151-170
pubmed: 32166602
J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2019 Aug;20(4):363-382
pubmed: 31102010
Am J Audiol. 2021 Jan 19;:1-16
pubmed: 33465327
J Acoust Soc Am. 1997 Apr;101(4):2151-63
pubmed: 9104018
J Neurosci. 2015 Feb 4;35(5):2161-72
pubmed: 25653371
J Neurophysiol. 2006 Nov;96(5):2327-41
pubmed: 16807349
Hear Res. 2018 Jul;364:142-151
pubmed: 29680183
J Neurosci. 2013 Aug 21;33(34):13686-94
pubmed: 23966690
Ear Hear. 2012 May-Jun;33(3):315-29
pubmed: 22436407
Am J Audiol. 2002 Jun;11(1):13-22
pubmed: 12227352
Ear Hear. 1983 Sep-Oct;4(5):247-50
pubmed: 6628849
Hear Res. 2015 Sep;327:78-88
pubmed: 26002688
Ear Hear. 1993 Dec;14(6):423-8
pubmed: 8307247
Hear Res. 2012 Jul;289(1-2):52-62
pubmed: 22560961
Ear Hear. 2019 May/Jun;40(3):458-467
pubmed: 30052557
Physiol Rev. 2004 Apr;84(2):541-77
pubmed: 15044682
J Speech Hear Res. 1988 Mar;31(1):87-97
pubmed: 3352259
J Am Acad Audiol. 2002 Apr;13(4):188-204
pubmed: 12025895
Front Aging Neurosci. 2015 Jan 13;6:347
pubmed: 25628563
Hear Res. 2019 Mar 15;374:35-48
pubmed: 30710791
J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2015 Dec;16(6):727-45
pubmed: 26323349
Neuroscience. 2019 May 21;407:8-20
pubmed: 30099118
Hear Res. 2020 Nov;397:107922
pubmed: 32111404
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2019 Nov 19;116(47):23753-23759
pubmed: 31685611
Hear Res. 2018 Mar;360:55-75
pubmed: 29472062
Hear Res. 2021 Feb;400:108132
pubmed: 33333426