Speech-in-Noise Difficulties in Aminoglycoside Ototoxicity Reflects Combined Afferent and Efferent Dysfunction
Motlagh Zadeh, L.; Izhiman, D.; Blankenship, C. M.; Moore, D. R.; Martin, D. K.; Garinis, A.; Feeney, P.; Hunter, L. R.
Show abstract
Objectives: Patients with Cystic fibrosis (CF) often receive aminoglycosides (AGs) to manage recurrent pulmonary infections, placing them at risk for ototoxicity. Chronic AG use can lead to complex cochlear damage affecting inner and outer hair cells, the stria vascularis, and spiral ganglion neurons. The greatest damage is typically in the basal cochlear region, which encodes high-frequency hearing, with additional involvement of more apical regions. While extended-high-frequency (EHF) hearing loss (EHFHL; 9-16 kHz) is often the earliest sign of AG ototoxicity, speech in noise (SiN) effects are rarely studied. Our overall hypothesis is that SiN perception difficulties in individuals with CF, treated with AGs, are related to combined cochlear and neural damage, primarily in the EHF range but also in the standard frequency (SF; 0.25-8 kHz) range. Three mechanisms that contribute to SiN perception were evaluated in children and young adults: 1) a primary effect of reduced EHF sensitivity, measured by pure-tone audiometry (PTA) and transient-evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAEs); 2) a secondary effect of subclinical damage in the SF range, measured by PTA and TEOAEs; and 3) additional neural effects, measured by middle ear muscle reflex (MEMR) threshold (afferent) and growth functions (efferent).Design:A total of 185 participants were enrolled; 101 individuals with CF treated with intravenous AGs and 84 age and sex-matched Controls without hearing concerns or CF. Assessments included EHF and SF PTA; the Bamford-Kowal-Bench (BKB)-SIN test for SiN perception; double-evoked TEOAEs with chirp stimuli from 0.71 to 14.7 kHz; and ipsilateral and contralateral wideband MEMR thresholds and growth functions using broadband stimuli. Results: Reduced sensitivity at EHFs (PTA, TEOAEs) was not associated with impaired SiN perception in the CF group. SF hearing, regardless of EHF status, was the primary predictor of SiN performance in the CF group. Increased MEMR growth was also significantly associated with poorer SiN in the CF group. Conclusions: In CF, impaired SiN perception was primarily predicted by SF hearing impairment, with additional involvement of the efferent auditory pathway through increased MEMR growth. These results build on prior evidence for efferent neural effects due to ototoxic exposures, supporting both sensory (afferent) and neural (efferent) mechanisms that contribute to listening difficulties in CF. Thus, preventive and intervention strategies should consider these combined mechanisms in people with AG ototoxicity to address their SiN problems.
Matching journals
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- The relationship between distortion product otoacoustic emissions and audiometric thresholds in the extended high-frequency range 98%
- Inherent envelope fluctuations in forward masking: Effects of age and hearing loss 97%
- Reducing interaural tonotopic mismatch preserves binaural unmasking in cochlear implant simulations of single-sided deafness 97%
Similar papers in this journal
- Improving Sensitivity of the Digits-in-Noise Test using Antiphasic Stimuli 97%
- Minimal and mild hearing loss in children: Association with auditory perception, cognition, and communication problems 97%
- Adaptive hearing aid benefit in children with mild/moderate hearing loss: A registered, double-blind, randomized clinical trial 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Predicting cochlear synaptopathy in mice with varying degrees of outer hair cell dysfunction using auditory evoked potentials 96%
- Rate discrimination training may partially restore temporal processing abilities from age-related deficits 96%
- Enhanced Place Specificity of the Parallel Auditory Brainstem Response: An Electrophysiological Study 96%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.