Effects of contralateral noise on envelope-following responses, auditory-nerve compound action potentials, and otoacoustic emissions measured simultaneously.
Shelby L FaubionRyan K ParkJeffery T LichtenhanSkyler G JenningsPublished in: The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America (2024)
This study assessed whether the effects of contralateral acoustic stimulation (CAS) are consistent with eliciting the medial olivocochlear (MOC) reflex for measurements sensitive to outer hair cell (otoacoustic emissions, OAEs), auditory-nerve (AN; compound action potential, CAP), and brainstem/cortical (envelope-following response, EFR) function. The effects of CAS were evaluated for simultaneous measurement of OAEs, CAPs, and EFRs in participants with normal hearing. Clicks were presented at 40 or 98 Hz in three ipsilateral noise conditions (no noise, 45 dB SPL, and 55 dB SPL). For the no noise condition, CAS suppressed or enhanced EFR amplitudes for 40- and 98-Hz clicks, respectively, while CAS had no significant effect on CAP amplitudes. A follow-up experiment using slower rates (4.4-22.2 Hz) assessed whether this insignificant CAS effect on CAPs was from ipsilateral MOC stimulation or AN adaptation; however, CAS effects remained insignificant despite favorable signal-to-noise ratios. CAS-related enhancements of EFR and CAP amplitudes in ipsilateral noise were not observed, contrary to the anti-masking effect of the MOC reflex. EFR and OAE suppression from CAS were not significantly correlated. Thus, the effects of CAS on EFRs may not be solely mediated by the MOC reflex and may be partially mediated by higher auditory centers.