论文部分内容阅读
分别用鼓岬电极和乳突电极作参考电极，记录了正常人、感音神经性聋及混合性聋患者的听性脑干反应（ａｕｄｉｔｏｒｙｂｒａｉｎｓｔｅｍｒｅｓｐｏｎｓｅ，ＡＢＲ），比较其相应的参量。并用鼓岬电极记录的耳蜗电图（ｅｌｅｃｔｒｏｃｏｃｈｌｅｏｇｒａｍ，ＥＣｏｃｈＧ）Ｎ１代替乳突电极法ＡＢＲ波Ⅰ，比较Ｎ１～Ⅴ与Ⅰ～Ⅴ波间期。实验结果：鼓岬电极法ＡＢＲ波Ⅰ振幅升高，出现率１００％，两种方法记录的ＡＢＲ波间期无显著性差异，而各波潜伏期均有显著性差异。Ｎ１～Ⅴ波间期大多比Ⅰ～Ⅴ波间期缩短，二者有显著性差异。表明用鼓岬电极作参考电极记录ＡＢＲ，可为耳蜗及蜗后病变的鉴别诊断提供有价值的参数。但如简单地以Ｎ１～Ⅴ替代Ⅰ～Ⅴ波间期用于临床，可能会产生假阴性的结果。
Drum Cape electrodes and mastoid electrodes were used as reference electrodes respectively to record the auditory brainstem response (ABR) of normal people, sensorineural hearing loss and mixed deafness, and their corresponding parameters were compared. Electrocochleogram (ECochG) N1 recorded by drumhead electrodes was used to replace ABR wave Ⅰ in mastoid electrode, and the wave interval between N1 ~ Ⅴ and Ⅰ ~ Ⅴ was compared. The results showed that the amplitude of ABR wave Ⅰ increased 100% in the promontory electrode method. There was no significant difference between the two methods in recording the ABR wave duration, but the latency of each wave was significantly different. The N1 ~ Ⅴ wave interval was mostly shorter than the Ⅰ ~ Ⅴ wave interval, both of which were significantly different. It is indicated that using the promontory electrodes as a reference electrode to record ABR can provide valuable parameters for the differential diagnosis of cochlear and retrocochlear lesions. However, simply substituting N1 ~ Ⅴ for Ⅰ ~ Ⅴ wave interval for clinical use may produce false negative results.