Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-bp2c4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-19T17:40:52.875Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Paradoxical long-term enhancement of distortion product otoacoustic emission amplitude after repeated exposure to moderate level, wide band noise in awake guinea pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 July 2009

L Mei ,
Z-W Huang  and
Z-Z Tao
L Mei
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Renmin Hospital, Wuhan University, China
Z-W Huang
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Renmin Hospital, Wuhan University, China
Z-Z Tao*
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Renmin Hospital, Wuhan University, China
*
Address for correspondence: Dr Ze-Zhang Tao, Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Renmin Hospital, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430060, China. Fax: +86 27 88043958 E-mail: zezhangtao@hotmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

Hearing sensitivity usually diminishes with noise exposure. In the present study, we examined the effect of 93 dB(A) wide band noise on cochlear micromechanical sensitivity in awake guinea pigs.

Methods:

Animals were randomly assigned to groups receiving either single or repeated noise exposure. Distortion product otoacoustic emission amplitudes were recorded before, during and after noise exposure.

Results:

Ninety-three decibel(A) wide band noise reduced the distortion product otoacoustic emission amplitudes at all tested frequencies. The distortion product otoacoustic emission amplitudes for higher frequencies showed a permanent reduction, whereas those for lower frequencies showed a temporary reduction. Distortion product otoacoustic emission amplitudes for middle frequencies showed prolonged enhancement after repeated noise exposure.

Conclusion:

Our results suggest that (1) it is likely that there are intermediate stages between permanent threshold shift and temporary threshold shift, and (2) long-term enhancement of distortion product otoacoustic emission amplitudes may be an indication of tinnitus generation.

Keywords

NoiseOtoacoustic EmissionsHearing DisordersCochlea

Information

Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 123 , Issue 10 , October 2009 , pp. 1090 - 1096
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1Kemp, DT. Stimulated acoustic emissions from within the human auditory system. J Acoust Soc Am 1978;64:1386–91CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2Yoshida, N, Liberman, MC. Sound conditioning reduces noise-induced permanent threshold shift in mice. Hear Res 2000;148:213–19CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3Wagner, W, Staud, I, Frank, G, Dammann, F, Plontke, S, Plinkert, PK. Noise in magnetic resonance imaging: no risk for sensorineural function but increased amplitude variability of otoacoustic emissions. Laryngoscope 2003;113:1216–23CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4Peng, JH, Tao, ZZ, Huang, ZW. Long-term sound conditioning increases distortion product otoacoustic emission amplitudes and decreases olivocochlear efferent reflex strength. Neuroreport 2007;18:1167–70CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5Oeken, J, Menz, D. Amplitude changes in distortion products of otoacoustic emissions after acute noise exposure [in German]. Laryngorhinootologie 1996;75:265–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6Kujawa, SG, Liberman, MC. Long-term sound conditioning enhances cochlear sensitivity. J Neurophysiol 1999;82:863–73CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7Cianfrone, G, Ingrosso, A, Altissimi, G, Ralli, G, Turchetta, R. DPOAE modifications induced by pure tone overstimulation in guinea pigs. Scand Audiol Suppl 1998;48:37–43Google ScholarPubMed
8Kirk, DL, Patuzzi, RB. Transient changes in cochlear potentials and DPOAEs after low-frequency tones: the ‘two-minute bounce’ revisited. Hear Res 1997;112:49–68CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9Huang, ZW, Luo, Y, Wu, Z, Tao, Z, Jones, RO, Zhao, HB. Paradoxical enhancement of active cochlear mechanics in long-term administration of salicylate. J Neurophysiol 2005;93:2053–61CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10Kim, DO, Leonard, G, Fallon, M, Bobbin, RP. Otoacoustic emissions and noise-induced hearing loss: human studies. In: Dancer, A, Henderson, D, Salvi, RJ, Hamernik, RP, eds. Noise-Induced Hearing Loss. St Louis: Mosby Year Book, 1992;476–88Google Scholar
11Kemp, DT. Cochlear echoes – implications for noise-induced hearing loss. In: Hamernik, RP, Henderson, D, Salvi, R, eds. New Perspectives in Noise-Induced Hearing Loss. New York: Raven Press, 1982;189–207Google Scholar
12Kemp, DT. Otoacoustic emissions, travelling waves and cochlear mechanisms. Hear Res 1986;22:95–104CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13Hirsh, IJ, Ward, WD. Recovery of the auditory threshold after strong acoustic stimulation. J Acoust Soc Am 1952;24:131–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14Yoshida, N, Kristiansen, A, Liberman, MC. Heat stress and protection from permanent acoustic injury in mice. J Neurosci 1999;19:10116–24CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15Murakoshi, M, Yoshida, N, Kitsunai, Y, Iida, K, Kumano, S, Suzuki, T et al. Effects of heat stress on Young's modulus of outer hair cells in mice. Brain Res 2006;1107:121–30CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16Wang, Y, Liberman, MC. Restraint stress and protection from acoustic injury in mice. Hear Res 2002;165:96–102CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17Raveh, E, Mount, RJ, Harrison, RV. Increased otoacoustic-emission amplitude secondary to cochlear lesions. J Otolaryngol 1998;27:354–60Google ScholarPubMed
18Kakigi, A, Hirakawa, H, Harel, N, Mount, RJ, Harrison, RV. Basal cochlear lesions result in increased amplitude of otoacoustic emissions. Audiol Neurootol 1998;3:361–72CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19Cevette, MJ, Drew, D, Webb, TM, Marion, MS. Cisplatin ototoxicity, increased DPOAE amplitudes, and magnesium deficiency. Distortion product otoacoustic emissions. J Am Acad Audiol 2000;11:323–9Google ScholarPubMed
20Yu, N, Zhu, ML, Johnson, B, Liu, YP, Jones, RO, Zhao, HB. Prestin up-regulation in chronic salicylate (aspirin) administration: an implication of functional dependence of prestin expression. Cell Mol Life Sci 2008;65:2407–18CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21Davis, B, Qiu, W, Hamernik, RP. Sensitivity of distortion product otoacoustic emissions in noise-exposed chinchillas. J Am Acad Audiol 2005;16:69–78Google ScholarPubMed
22Sutton, LA, Lonsbury-Martin, BL, Martin, GK, Whitehead, ML. Sensitivity of distortion-product otoacoustic emissions in humans to tonal over-exposure: time course of recovery and effects of lowering L2. Hear Res 1994;75:161–74CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23Gaskill, SA, Brown, AM. The behavior of the acoustic distortion product, 2f1-f2, from the human ear and its relation to auditory sensitivity. J Acoust Soc Am 1990;88:821–39CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
24Kemp, DT. Physiologically active cochlear micromechanics: a source of tinnitus. In: Tinnitus, CIBA Foundation Symposium No. 85. London: Pitmans Medical, 1981;54–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25Cazals, Y, Horner, KC, Huang, ZW. Alterations in average spectrum of cochleoneural activity by long-term salicylate treatment in the guinea pig: a plausible index of tinnitus. J Neurophysiol 1998;80:2113–20CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
26Janssen, T, Kummer, P, Arnold, W. Growth behavior of the 2 f1-f2 distortion product otoacoustic emission in tinnitus. J Acoust Soc Am 1998;103:3418–30CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
27Hesse, G, Schaaf, H, Laubert, A. Specific findings in distortion product otoacoustic emissions and growth functions with chronic tinnitus. Int Tinnitus J 2005;11:6–13Google ScholarPubMed
28Henry, JA, Meikle, M, Gilbert, A. Audiometric correlates of tinnitus pitch: insights from the Tinnitus Data Registry. In: Hazell, J, ed. Proceedings of the Sixth International Tinnitus Seminar. The Tinnitus and Hyperacusis Center, London, 1999;51–7Google Scholar
29Konig, O, Schaette, R, Kempter, R, Gross, M. Course of hearing loss and occurrence of tinnitus. Hear Res 2006;221:59–64CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
30Norena, A, Micheyl, C, Chery-Croze, S, Collet, L. Psychoacoustic characterization of the tinnitus spectrum: implications for the underlying mechanisms of tinnitus. Audiol Neurootol 2002;7:358–69CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
31Roberts, LE, Moffat, G, Bosnyak, DJ. Residual inhibition functions in relation to tinnitus spectra and auditory threshold shift. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl 2006;556:27–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
32Frank, G, Kösslo, M. The acoustic two-tone distortions 2f1-f2 and f2-f1 and their possible relation to changes in the operating point of the cochlear amplifier. Hear Res 1996;98:104–15CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
33Arnold, DJ, Lonsbury-Martin, BL, Martin, GK. High-frequency hearing influences lower-frequency distortion-product otoacoustic emissions. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1999;125:215–22CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed