Observing frequency following response in recording of 500 Hz tone burst-evoked auditory brainstem response
AbstractBackground and Aim: Frequency following response (FFR) is a neural response with multiple origins. The purpose of current study is to record FFR with alternative and single polarity 500 Hz tone burst stimuli in the setting of auditory brainstem response (ABR).
Methods: The population of this observational study consists of 21 adults (n=42 ears) with a mean age of 22.43 (SD=1.51), with 8 out 21 (38%) being female. The participant shows normal results in otoscopy, tympanometry, acoustic reflex, pure tone audiometry, speech recognition threshold, and speech discrimination score. They underwent ABR with a click and various polarities of 500 Hz tone burst stimuli.
Results: First, latencies of ABR waveform with the alternative polarity of click and tone burst were compared and then with changing the polarity to single polarity, FFR was recorded in 24 ears (about 57%) using the 500 Hz tone burst stimuli. The results showed that in some patients changing the polarity caused a better morphology.
Conclusion: In some cases, FFR can be recorded in ABR setting. In addition, because of large amplitude, they fade away ABR waveforms.
2. Bidelman GM. Multichannel recordings of the human brainstem frequency-following response: scalp topography, source generators, and distinctions from the transient ABR. Hear Res. 2015;323:68-80. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2015.01.011
3. Krishnan A. Frequency-following response. In: Burkard RF, Eggermont JJ, Don M, editors. Auditory evoked potentials: basic principles and clinical application. 1st ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2007. p. 313-33.
4. Coffey EB, Colagrosso EM, Lehmann A, Schönwiesner M, Zatorre RJ. Individual differences in the frequency-following response: relation to pitch perception. PLoS One. 2016;11(3):e0152374. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0152374
5. Xie Z, Reetzke R, Chandrasekaran B. Stability and plasticity in neural encoding of linguistically relevant pitch patterns. J Neurophysiol. 2017;117(3):1407-1422. doi: 10.1152/jn.00445.2016
6. Jeng FC, Lin CD, Sabol JT, Hollister GR, Chou MS, Chen CH, et al. Pitch perception and frequency-following responses elicited by lexical-tone chimeras. Int J Audiol. 2016;55(1):53-63. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2015.1072774
7. Gong Q, Xu Q, Sun W. Design and implementation of frequency-following response recording system. Int J Audiol. 2013;52(12):824-31. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2013.834537
8. King A, Hopkins K, Plack CJ. Differential group delay of the frequency following response measured vertically and horizontally. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2016;17(2):133-43. doi: 10.1007/s10162-016-0556-x
9. Ananthakrishnan S, Krishnan A, Bartlett E. Human frequency following response: neural representation of envelope and temporal fine structure in listeners with normal hearing and sensorineural hearing loss. Ear Hear. 2016;37(2):e91-e103. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000247
10. Hall JW., III . eHandbook of Auditory Evoked Responses: Principles, Procedures & Protocols. Kindle Direct Publishing; 2015. Available from: https://www.amazon.com/eHandbook-Auditory-Evoked-Responses-Principles-ebook/dp/B0145G2FFM
11. Hall JW. New handbook of auditory evoked responses. 1st ed. Boston: Pearson; 2007.
12. Huis in't Veld F, Osterhammel P, Terkildsen K. Frequency following auditory brain stem responses in man. Scand Audiol. 1977;6(1):27-34.
13. Kumar K, Bhat JS, D'Costa PE, Srivastava M, Kalaiah MK. Effect of stimulus polarity on speech evoked auditory brainstem response. Audiol Res. 2014;3(1):e8. doi: 10.4081/audiores.2013.e8
14. Johnson KL, Nicol TG, Kraus N. Brain stem response to speech: a biological marker of auditory processing. Ear Hear. 2005;26(5):424-34.
15. Tichko P, Skoe E. Frequency-dependent fine structure in the frequency-following response: The byproduct of multiple generators. Hear Res. 2017;348:1-15. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2017.01.014