Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Auditory brainstem response

The auditory brainstem response (ABR), also known as the brainstem auditory evoked response (BAER) or brainstem auditory evoked potential (BAEP), is a noninvasive electrophysiological test that objectively measures the synchronized neural activity along the auditory pathway from the auditory nerve to the in response to brief auditory stimuli such as clicks or tones. This test records electrical potentials via surface electrodes placed on the , capturing a series of five main waves (I through V) that occur within the first 10 milliseconds after stimulus onset, each corresponding to specific anatomical sites: wave I from the auditory nerve, wave II from the , wave III from the , wave IV from the , and wave V from the . Developed in the 1970s, ABR has become a cornerstone of audiological and neurological assessment, particularly for evaluating hearing thresholds and detecting abnormalities in the without requiring active participation. It is especially valuable for newborns, infants, young children, and individuals with developmental disabilities who cannot undergo traditional behavioral hearing tests, serving as the gold standard for confirming in those who fail universal newborn hearing screenings. Clinically, ABR aids in diagnosing , acoustic neuromas, tumors, , and other neurological disorders affecting the eighth cranial nerve or pathways, with high sensitivity (92-98%) for detecting large vestibular schwannomas greater than 1.5 cm. The procedure involves placing electrodes according to the International 10-20 system (typically at the , mastoids, and forehead), delivering stimuli like rarefaction clicks at 80-90 dB normal hearing level through earphones or inserts, and averaging thousands of responses to isolate the signals from , often requiring the patient to remain still or be sedated in young children. Analysis focuses on wave latencies, interpeak intervals (e.g., I-V for conduction time), amplitudes, and thresholds, which correlate well with at frequencies of 1-4 kHz, though normative data must account for factors like age, gender, race, and head shape to ensure accuracy. While generally safe, ABR testing carries minimal risks, such as rare sedation-related complications in , and is also used intraoperatively to monitor auditory nerve function during surgeries like tumor resections.

Fundamentals

Definition and Physiological Basis

The auditory brainstem response (ABR) is an objective electrophysiological measure that assesses the function of the auditory nerve (cranial nerve VIII) and the ascending auditory pathway within the , captured as a series of voltage fluctuations recorded from scalp electrodes in response to brief acoustic stimuli such as clicks. This response reflects the synchronous firing of neuronal populations along the peripheral and central auditory pathways, providing a non-invasive window into the integrity of neural conduction from the to the . The ABR is generated within the first 10 milliseconds following stimulus onset, distinguishing it from longer-latency cortical evoked potentials. Physiologically, the ABR arises from volume-conducted far-field potentials produced by the coordinated activation of auditory nerve fibers and brainstem nuclei in response to sound-induced depolarization in the cochlea. Sound waves are transduced into electrical signals by hair cells in the organ of Corti, which trigger action potentials in the spiral ganglion neurons of the auditory nerve; these signals propagate rostrally through relay stations including the cochlear nucleus, superior olivary complex, and inferior colliculus. The resulting ABR waveform consists of five major vertex-positive peaks (Waves I–V), each attributable to specific neural generators: Wave I originates from the distal portion of the auditory nerve near the internal auditory meatus; Wave II from the proximal auditory nerve and intrapontine pathways; Wave III primarily from the cochlear nucleus with contributions from the superior olivary complex; Wave IV from the superior olivary complex and the contralateral lateral lemniscus; and Wave V from the termination of the lateral lemniscus in the inferior colliculus. These generators ensure that the ABR captures both peripheral (auditory nerve) and central (brainstem) auditory processing. Latency, defined as the time from stimulus onset to the peak of each wave, and , the voltage difference between peak and trough, are core characteristics of the ABR that vary systematically. In adults, typical absolute latencies are approximately 1.7 for Wave I, 3.9 for Wave III, and 5.7 for Wave V at moderate stimulus intensities (e.g., 80 nHL), with interpeak latencies such as I–III (~2.1 ), III–V (~1.8 ), and I–V (~4.0 ) indicating conduction times along the pathway. Latencies shorten with increasing stimulus due to enhanced neural and faster axonal conduction, while amplitudes increase as more fibers are recruited. Several factors influence ABR metrics, reflecting underlying physiological adaptations. Age-related changes are prominent, with neonates exhibiting prolonged latencies (e.g., Wave V ~7–8 ms) compared to adults, attributable to immature myelination and synaptic efficiency in the auditory pathway that mature over the first few months of life. Stimulus rate also modulates the response; higher presentation rates (e.g., >20/s) can induce , leading to slight latency prolongation (0.1–0.5 ms for Wave V) and reduced amplitudes due to periods in auditory nerve fibers.

Neural Generation of ABR Waves

The auditory brainstem response (ABR) consists of a series of vertex-positive waves generated by synchronized neural activity along the ascending auditory pathway, primarily reflecting far-field potentials from volume conduction of action potentials and postsynaptic events in the . These waves arise from specific neuroanatomical sites, with each component linked to distinct fiber tracts and nuclei, as elucidated through intracranial recordings, studies, and in humans and animals. The generators produce dipole sources whose orientations allow summation and projection to the electrodes, enabling non-invasive detection. Wave I is generated by the compound action potential of distal auditory nerve fibers (cranial nerve VIII) near the cochlear entry, reflecting synchronous firing of primary afferent neurons from the spiral ganglion. Wave II originates from the proximal portion of the auditory nerve and possibly the cochlear root neurons as they approach the brainstem. Wave III primarily arises from postsynaptic activity in the ipsilateral cochlear nucleus, involving both dorsal and ventral divisions, with contributions from second-order neurons in the caudal pontine tegmentum. Wave IV is attributed to the contralateral superior olivary complex and bilateral nuclei of the lateral lemniscus, capturing third-order neuronal firing in the upper pons. Wave V, the most robust and scalp-prominent peak, is mainly generated by the main contralateral inferior colliculus in the midbrain, with potential minor contributions from the medial geniculate body and terminating fibers of the lateral lemniscus. At the synaptic level, later ABR waves (III-V) are shaped by postsynaptic potentials in brainstem nuclei, where excitatory and inhibitory synaptic currents generate transient voltage shifts that summate across neuronal populations to form the far-field signal. These potentials create aligned dipoles—radial or tangential to the scalp surface—whose coherent activation, driven by the broad-spectrum stimulus, produces the characteristic waveform peaks and troughs observable at the . While ABR is predominantly neural, potential overlap exists with myogenic artifacts such as the post-auricular muscle response (PAMR), a large from the post-auricular musculature, and the cochlear microphonic (), a from outer hair cells; however, standard ABR recording techniques minimize these through placement and filtering, ensuring neural far-fields dominate. Anesthesia influences ABR generation by inducing neuronal desynchronization, which reduces wave amplitudes (particularly for waves III-V) and slightly prolongs latencies due to enhanced synaptic delays and depressed excitability in brainstem nuclei. In developmental contexts, ABR wave morphology shifts from neonates to adults as myelination progresses along the auditory pathway, resulting in shorter latencies (e.g., wave V decreases by about 1-2 ms by age 2) and increased amplitude sharpness, reflecting maturation of synaptic efficiency and fiber conduction velocities in the cochlear nucleus and beyond.

Historical Development

Discovery and Early Studies

The auditory brainstem response (ABR) was first described in humans by Don L. Jewett, M. N. Romano, and J. S. Williston in 1970, who used computer-based signal averaging to detect small-amplitude, early-latency potentials from scalp electrodes in response to stimuli. These researchers identified five vertex-positive peaks (labeled I through V) occurring within approximately 10 milliseconds post-stimulus, suggesting origins in the auditory pathway rather than cortical or cochlear sources. This breakthrough built on prior work differentiating neural action potentials from cochlear , notably by Robert Galambos in the and , who demonstrated suppression of microphonic responses via olivocochlear bundle stimulation in cats, confirming neural components in evoked responses. Pioneering efforts in research, led by Hallowell Davis in the , established the foundations for ABR by advancing and scalp-recorded auditory potentials in humans and animals, emphasizing the need for averaging to isolate responses from background EEG noise. Early animal studies in the , such as those by D. C. Teas, D. H. Eldredge, and H. Davis on cats, utilized averaging techniques to record whole-nerve action potentials in response to acoustic transients, providing initial evidence of involvement through comparisons of intact and lesioned preparations. These experiments demonstrated that early peaks persisted despite cochlear disruptions but were altered by brainstem manipulations, supporting the ABR's subcortical origin. Technological advancements, including George Dawson's 1954 invention of the averaging method and the commercial availability of Computer of Average Transients (CAT) systems in the , were crucial enablers, allowing summation of multiple trials to enhance signal-to-noise ratios by factors of 10 or more. Initial clinical validation of ABR occurred in the , with studies by C. Schulman-Galambos and R. Galambos demonstrating its utility for estimating auditory thresholds in infants and premature newborns, where behavioral testing was unreliable. Their work showed ABR wave V latencies correlating closely with hearing sensitivity, with thresholds typically 10-20 above adult psychophysical levels in healthy neonates, paving the way for objective hearing assessment without dependency. These foundational investigations, conducted up to the late , focused on and validation rather than widespread adoption.

Evolution of Clinical Use

The transition of auditory brainstem response (ABR) from a primarily research-oriented tool to a cornerstone of clinical practice accelerated in the 1980s through key standardization efforts. The Joint Committee on Infant Hearing (JCIH) endorsed ABR as a reliable physiologic measure for screening high-risk newborns in its 1982 position statement, recommending identification of infants at risk for hearing impairment via objective electrophysiological testing to enable early . This marked a shift toward ABR's routine use in neonatal care, emphasizing its objectivity over behavioral methods prone to false positives. Concurrently, the development of automated ABR (A-ABR) systems, such as Natus Medical's ALGO screener introduced in 1985, streamlined clinical adoption by automating waveform detection and reducing operator dependency, making ABR feasible for hospital-based screening programs. The 1990s saw significant expansions in ABR's clinical indications, driven by regulatory advancements and protocol innovations. The U.S. (FDA) cleared early A-ABR devices like the ALGO-2 in 1995, enabling their integration into emerging universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS) initiatives across states, which shifted from risk-based to population-wide application. The JCIH's 1990 position statement further mandated physiologic screening for all newborns using measures like ABR or otoacoustic emissions (OAEs), recognizing ABR's sensitivity in detecting issues beyond peripheral . To enhance efficiency and reduce costs, ABR was increasingly combined with OAEs in two-stage protocols, where initial OAE screening triaged cases for confirmatory ABR, achieving referral rates under 5% while covering both cochlear and retrocochlear pathologies. Milestones in policy and technology further propelled ABR's global integration into the early 2000s. The Healthy People 2010 initiative set ambitious targets, including screening 90% of newborns for by age 1 month and confirming diagnoses by 3 months, which catalyzed widespread UNHS adoption and increased ABR utilization in over 1,800 U.S. hospitals by the decade's end. These goals influenced international programs, promoting ABR as a standard for early detection. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) guidelines from the 1990s reinforced ABR's role in neurological assessments, particularly for comatose patients, where it provided non-invasive evaluation of integrity. Overcoming initial barriers was crucial to ABR's clinical evolution. Automated systems addressed lengthy test durations by employing statistical detection algorithms and faster signal averaging, reducing screening time from several minutes to 15-30 seconds per ear, thus improving throughput in busy neonatal units. Additionally, the establishment of international normative databases during the and , derived from large cohorts of normal-hearing individuals, standardized wave and criteria across populations, enhancing diagnostic reliability and cross-study comparability.

Measurement Procedures

Stimulus and Electrode Setup

The acoustic stimulus for eliciting the auditory brainstem response (ABR) is a click, which provides stimulation primarily covering frequencies from 500 Hz to 4000 Hz, with emphasis on higher frequencies due to the rapid onset of the signal. These clicks are typically presented at intensities ranging from 20 to 90 normal hearing level (nHL), starting at higher levels (e.g., 80-90 nHL) and decreasing in 10 dB steps to estimate , at repetition rates of 19-49 clicks per second (varying by test type: higher for audiological threshold testing, lower for neurological assessment) to balance response reliability and patient tolerance. Alternating between and is commonly employed to minimize the cochlear microphonic artifact, enhancing the clarity of neural components. For assessing , bone-conduction clicks are used, delivered via a bone oscillator placed on the mastoid process or , with intensities adjusted lower (e.g., 20-50 nHL) to account for limitations and typical maximum outputs of 45-55 nHL. Air-conduction stimuli are transduced using insert earphones (preferred for infants to reduce leakage) or supra-aural , while bone-conduction employs a standard secured firmly to avoid slippage. Stimulus is performed in nHL, referenced to behavioral averages from young adults with normal hearing, with annual acoustic verification using couplers (e.g., 2-cc for air conduction) and daily checks to ensure output stability within 1 . Electrode placement follows the International 10-20 system, with the non-inverting (active) electrode at the vertex (Cz) to maximize detection of Wave V, the inverting (reference) electrode on the ipsilateral mastoid (or earlobe), and the ground electrode at the forehead (Fpz). Silver-chloride cup or self-adhesive electrodes are applied after skin preparation involving mild abrasion and conductive paste to achieve impedances below 5 kΩ (ideally ≤3 kΩ) with inter-electrode differences under 2 kΩ, ensuring low noise and balanced recordings. For bilateral testing, a two-channel montage records responses from each ear separately. Patient preparation emphasizes a quiet, dimly lit environment to promote relaxation or natural sleep (preferred for infants under 6 months), with sedation only if necessary using modern agents such as intranasal dexmedetomidine (2-4 μg/kg) or oral midazolam (0.3-0.5 mg/kg) to minimize myogenic artifacts; chloral hydrate (50-75 mg/kg) or hydroxyzine have been used historically but are less preferred due to safety concerns as of 2025.

Recording and Artifact Management

The recording of auditory brainstem response (ABR) involves signal acquisition from electrodes, where the small neural potentials (typically 0.1-0.5 μV) are amplified, ed, and averaged to extract the response from . The process relies on synchronous summation of evoked responses across multiple stimulus presentations, known as epochs or sweeps, to enhance the (SNR). Typically, 1500-4000 epochs are averaged, with a stimulus repetition rate of 19-49 Hz (higher for standard audiological testing per guidelines, e.g., 45-49/s; lower, e.g., 11-21/s, for neurological applications to allow neural ) to efficiency and test objectives. Bandpass filtering is applied at 30-1500 Hz or broader 100-3000 Hz to isolate ABR frequencies while attenuating low-frequency drifts and high-frequency noise, and a filter at 50/60 Hz removes powerline interference. provides a of 100,000-300,000 to boost the microvolt-level signals for . Artifact management is critical to prevent contamination of the averaged waveform, as physiological and environmental noise can obscure ABR components. Common artifacts include electromyographic (EMG) activity from muscle tension, which is mitigated by patient relaxation techniques, such as supine positioning or sedation in infants and uncooperative adults, to minimize broadband noise. Eye blink artifacts, manifesting as large positive deflections, are reduced through strategic ground electrode placement on the contralateral mastoid and instructions to keep eyes closed. Electrical hum at 60 Hz is addressed via electromagnetic shielding of the recording setup and the aforementioned notch filtering. Epoch rejection is employed during averaging, discarding sweeps exceeding ±25-50 μV peak-to-peak to exclude high-amplitude artifacts, with thresholds adjusted based on patient cooperation (e.g., starting at ±5-10 μV in ideal conditions). The efficiency of ABR recording is optimized for clinical feasibility, typically lasting 5-15 minutes per ear, depending on stimulus type and patient factors. Adaptive stopping criteria halt averaging once the SNR exceeds 3:1, ensuring adequate waveform clarity without unnecessary prolongation, though lower thresholds like 2.5:1 may be accepted in challenging cases. Quality of the recorded ABR is evaluated through and objective metrics to confirm reliability. Duplicate runs at the same intensity are compared for waveform overlay, with correlation coefficients above 0.9 indicating high consistency. Automated tools, such as the Fsp ( quotient), provide a statistical measure of ABR presence by computing the variance of spectral power in the response window relative to noise, aiding threshold detection with values exceeding critical (e.g., F > 4 for p < 0.05). F-wave detection algorithms further automate quality assessment by identifying consistent brainstem transients across runs.

Waveform Analysis

Identification of ABR Components

The identification of auditory brainstem response (ABR) components begins with visual inspection of the recorded waveform, focusing on characteristic peaks and their temporal positions relative to stimulus onset. Wave I is typically recognized as the initial negativity occurring around 1.2-1.9 ms post-stimulus, reflecting synchronous activity from the distal . Wave III manifests as a subsequent positive deflection at approximately 3.3-4.2 ms, associated with activity near the . Wave V, the most robust and clinically emphasized peak due to its prominence, is identified as the largest positivity between 5 and 7 ms post-stimulus, often followed by a distinct trough that aids in delineation from noise. To confirm labeling, interpeak intervals provide key consistency checks: the I-III interval measures about 2 ms, while the III-V interval is similarly around 2 ms, helping distinguish true components from artifacts or overlapping noise in the trace. These visual criteria emphasize morphology, with Wave V's sharp peak-trough pattern serving as the primary anchor for alignment in moderate-to-high intensity recordings (e.g., 70-90 dB nHL clicks). Latency-intensity functions further refine identification by evaluating how component timing varies with stimulus level. For Wave V, latency shortens by approximately 0.04 ms per dB increase above threshold in normal-hearing individuals (or 0.3-0.4 ms per 10 dB), producing a linear slope that assesses growth rate; steeper or shallower slopes may indicate altered neural synchrony, though identification relies on tracing this progression across intensity steps to isolate the threshold response. Amplitude measures support visual confirmation, with Wave V typically exhibiting a peak-to-trough value of 0.1-1 μV in clean traces, reflecting adequate neural summation. The I-V amplitude ratio, computed as Wave V amplitude divided by Wave I amplitude and exceeding 0.5 in typical cases, helps validate peripheral integrity when Wave I is discernible; ratios below this may suggest identification challenges from reduced distal activity. Objective methods complement visual approaches for automated or unbiased labeling, particularly in noisy data. Template matching compares the recorded waveform against predefined ABR templates, scoring similarity to confirm component presence based on latency and shape alignment. Statistical detection techniques, such as the q-ratio (a signal-to-noise metric evaluating peak significance against baseline variance), quantify wave reliability without subjective input. Phase coherence across repeated runs, often assessed via metrics like the Fmp (phase variance minimum), verifies consistent ABR morphology by measuring vector alignment of responses, with values above 2.2 indicating detectable components in newborns and higher thresholds (e.g., 7) for adults. Common pitfalls in ABR component identification include absent waves in severe hearing loss, where profound thresholds prevent sufficient auditory nerve synchronization, resulting in flat or undifferentiated traces lacking identifiable peaks. Prolonged latencies, as seen in demyelinating conditions like multiple sclerosis, can displace waves beyond expected windows (e.g., Wave V >7 ms), mimicking artifacts and necessitating intensity adjustments or replicated runs for accurate labeling.

Normative Data and Interpretation

Normative data for auditory brainstem response (ABR) in adults typically include absolute latencies and interpeak intervals (IPLs) measured at moderate stimulus intensities, such as 60 normal hearing level (nHL). For click-evoked ABR, the Wave V latency ranges from approximately 5.5 to 6.5 ms at 60 nHL in individuals with normal hearing. The I-V IPL is normally 4.0 to 4.4 ms, with values exceeding 4.4 ms considered abnormal. Click-evoked ABR thresholds in adults with normal hearing are generally 20 to 30 nHL, reflecting the broadband nature of the stimulus that primarily assesses mid-to-high frequencies. In pediatric populations, ABR latencies are longer due to ongoing myelination of the . Neonates exhibit Wave V latencies 1 to 2 ms longer than adults at comparable intensities, with gradual shortening over time. This maturation process continues rapidly in the first few years, reaching near-adult values by 18 to 24 months of age, after which further changes are minimal. Gender and interaural differences in latencies are minimal across age groups, though slight variations may occur due to head size or stimulus factors. ABR thresholds provide an estimate of behavioral hearing thresholds, particularly approximating the pure-tone average () across 500 to 4000 Hz for stimuli, as the emphasizes these frequencies. ABR estimation from Wave V accounts for the typical latency-intensity relationship with a of ~0.04 per , where each 0.1 prolongation corresponds to roughly 2-3 of . Criteria for abnormality focus on deviations from these norms to infer . Absent ABR waves at intensities up to 70 dB nHL suggest a exceeding 70 dB, often cochlear in origin. Prolongation of IPLs, such as I-V greater than 1 standard deviation above the mean (typically >0.2-0.3 ms interaural difference), indicates potential retrocochlear involvement, as it reflects central conduction delays. Several factors contribute to variability in ABR metrics, necessitating corrections for accurate interpretation. Body temperature influences latencies, with hypothermia prolonging them by up to 0.1-0.2 ms per °C decrease below 37°C, while shortens them. conditions, such as , can delay Wave I and subsequent waves by reducing sound transmission, mimicking conductive . Additionally, the non-flat of click stimuli limits low-frequency assessment, requiring frequency-specific adjustments for comprehensive evaluation.
ABR MetricAdult Norm (at 60-80 dB nHL)Pediatric Note (Neonates)
Wave V Latency5.5-6.5 ms1-2 ms longer; matures by 18-24 months
I-V IPL4.0-4.4 msProportionally similar but absolute values longer
Click Threshold20-30 dB nHLSimilar, but interpretation adjusted for maturation

Clinical Applications

Hearing Screening and Diagnosis

The auditory brainstem response (ABR) plays a pivotal role in newborn hearing screening programs, enabling objective detection of in infants who cannot provide behavioral responses. Universal newborn hearing screening protocols, as recommended by the Joint Committee on Infant Hearing (JCIH) in 2019, endorse the use of automated ABR (A-ABR) either as a primary tool or in a two-tier approach following otoacoustic emissions (OAE) screening for infants who refer on the initial test. In the two-tier OAE-ABR model, pass/refer criteria are based on the presence of replicable Wave V responses at moderate intensities, achieving low false-positive rates while identifying bilateral sensory with high reliability. This approach ensures early identification, with referral for diagnostic evaluation if no response is elicited, facilitating diagnostic evaluation by three months and by six months of age as per JCIH 1-3-6 timelines. In diagnostic settings, ABR is essential for estimating pure-tone thresholds in infants and young children, particularly those with developmental delays or inability to participate in behavioral audiometry. Click-evoked ABR thresholds correlate closely with behavioral pure-tone averages at 2-4 kHz, allowing clinicians to infer hearing levels within 10-15 dB for moderate to profound losses. ABR also aids in differentiating conductive from sensorineural hearing loss: in conductive cases, interpeak latencies (IPLs) remain normal despite elevated air-conduction thresholds, whereas sensorineural losses show elevated thresholds with typically preserved IPLs unless severe cochlear damage is present. Bone-conduction ABR is employed to confirm air-bone gaps greater than 15 dB, isolating the sensorineural component and verifying conductive pathology such as otitis media with effusion. For neurological diagnosis, ABR evaluates retrocochlear and pathologies by assessing IPL abnormalities. Prolongation of the I-V IPL, often exceeding 0.2 ms interaurally, indicates retrocochlear lesions like acoustic neuroma (vestibular schwannoma), with sensitivity around 90% for tumors larger than 1 cm. In disorders such as , delays in the III-V IPL reflect demyelination in the caudal , providing objective evidence of central auditory pathway involvement. ABR demonstrates sensitivity of 80-95% for detecting moderate to profound (>40 HL) in diagnostic contexts, making it a robust tool for confirming sensory impairments in screening referrals. However, its utility diminishes for mild losses (<30 HL) or high frequencies (>4 kHz), where responses may be absent or unreliable due to the broad-spectrum nature of click stimuli. To address sloping audiograms, frequency-specific ABR protocols utilize tone-burst or notched-noise stimuli at 500 Hz, 2 kHz, and 4 kHz to estimate thresholds across the frequency range, improving accuracy for uneven losses. Bone-conduction testing complements these by quantifying air-bone gaps and ruling out conductive contributions in complex cases.

Intraoperative Monitoring

Auditory brainstem response (ABR) monitoring is employed during surgeries involving the posterior fossa, such as resection and for , to assess the integrity of the auditory pathway in and guide efforts to preserve hearing. In surgery, ABR helps detect potential to the cochlear nerve (VIII cranial nerve) during tumor removal via approaches like retrosigmoid or middle fossa. Similarly, in for , ABR tracks auditory function amid manipulation near the and cochlear nerve to minimize complications. Intraoperative protocols adapt standard ABR techniques for the operating room environment, using continuous click stimulation at rates of 30-50 stimuli per second to enable rapid updates, with reduced averaging of 400-500 epochs to generate responses every 10-30 seconds. Alerts are triggered by significant changes, including a wave V increase exceeding 1 ms or 10% from baseline, or an amplitude drop greater than 50%, prompting surgeons to adjust maneuvers such as reducing traction on the VIII nerve. These thresholds are based on established guidelines for significant neural compromise. Stable intraoperative ABR waveforms predict high rates of postoperative hearing preservation, with studies reporting 80-90% success in maintaining serviceable hearing when no major changes occur, particularly for smaller tumors in acoustic neuroma cases. In hemifacial spasm surgeries, ABR monitoring reduces the incidence of to approximately 3-4%, compared to 8-20% without it, by allowing timely interventions. Challenges include anesthesia-induced latency prolongation, which is mitigated by establishing a pre-incision for comparison, and artifacts from positioning or surgical instruments, necessitating robust artifact rejection algorithms. ABR is often integrated multimodally with monitoring during these procedures to simultaneously protect both auditory and motor functions, enhancing overall cranial nerve preservation. Postoperative ABR testing may be performed immediately after surgery to evaluate residual auditory function and correlate intraoperative stability with long-term outcomes.

Specialized Uses

and Fitting

Auditory brainstem response (ABR) plays a key role in verifying performance, particularly in infants and young children where behavioral testing is challenging. ABR measurements of aided thresholds help ensure that the amplification provided matches prescriptive formulas such as the Desired Sensation Level version 5 (DSL v5), which targets audibility for across frequencies. By comparing unaided and aided ABR thresholds, clinicians can adjust gain settings to avoid under- or over-amplification, with correction factors applied to ABR results providing accurate estimates of behavioral thresholds in pediatric populations. This objective approach is essential for early fitting, as delays in appropriate amplification can impact . In (CI) candidacy and , preoperative ABR assesses auditory nerve viability, helping determine suitability for implantation in cases of profound or neural . Postoperative electrically evoked ABR (EABR) aids in programming by correlating with neural response (NRT) measures, particularly Wave V and latency, to set parameters. EABR thresholds often align closely with minimum stimulation levels (T-levels), enabling reliable even in non-responsive patients. Growth functions derived from EABR responses across stimulus levels further guide T-level setting and electrode-specific loudness balancing, ensuring balanced perception across the array. The primary benefits of ABR in device fitting include its objectivity for pediatric and uncooperative patients, reducing reliance on subjective and minimizing fitting errors. ABR-guided adjustments have been shown to improve comfort by preventing over-amplification, with studies indicating enhanced aided outcomes in young children. These applications underscore ABR's role in optimizing amplification for improved auditory .

Assessment of Central Auditory Function

The auditory brainstem response (ABR) plays a key role in assessing central auditory function by evaluating neural synchrony and conduction along the auditory pathway from the cochlear nerve to the , particularly in (NICU) settings for tracking developmental maturation. In infants at risk for auditory neuropathy spectrum disorder (ANSD), ABR testing often reveals dissociated patterns, such as preserved cochlear microphonics (reflecting intact outer function) alongside absent or severely abnormal ABR waveforms, including reduced or absent Wave V, which indicates disrupted neural synchrony beyond the . This pattern aids in early identification of ANSD in NICU populations, where transient cases may resolve by 12 months, allowing timely interventions like cochlear implantation to support central auditory development. In low-risk preterm infants, serial ABR monitoring demonstrates progressive shortening of interpeak latencies (IPLs), reflecting myelination and synaptic maturation in the brainstem pathways. ABR abnormalities in central pathologies highlight its utility in detecting brainstem dysfunction. For instance, brainstem lesions from ischemic can produce asymmetric IPLs, such as interaural differences exceeding 0.4 ms in Wave V, indicating unilateral conduction delays in the pontine or auditory tracts. Prolonged central latencies, particularly in IPLs I-III or III-V, correlate with (APD) in children, suggesting impaired temporal processing in subcortical structures despite normal peripheral hearing thresholds. These findings support ABR's role in differentiating central from peripheral deficits, though results vary by lesion location, with some pontomesencephalic s yielding normal responses. Following cochlear implantation, ABR metrics reveal central , as electrically evoked responses show reduced Wave V latencies and IPLs over the first two years post-implantation, indicating in nuclei to direct neural . In pediatric users, consistent apical or basal promotes developmental shortening of IPLs, underscoring the auditory 's capacity for reorganization and improved synchrony. This is more pronounced in early-implanted children, mitigating deprivation-induced changes and enhancing central auditory pathway efficiency. Emerging research positions ABR as a potential for cognitive functions, with Wave V timing linked to processes like and in preclinical models. A 2024 study demonstrated associations between ABR Wave V parameters and medial functions related to and , suggesting subcortical timing influences higher-order processing. However, ABR's primary focus on limits its sensitivity to cortical auditory processing, often requiring integration with middle latency responses (MLRs) for a comprehensive central profile, as absent MLRs alongside normal ABRs signal thalamocortical involvement. This combination enhances detection of higher-level deficits but highlights ABR's specificity to early neural stages.

Variants and Advanced Techniques

Frequency-Specific ABR Methods

Frequency-specific auditory brainstem response (ABR) methods adapt the standard click-evoked ABR to estimate hearing thresholds at targeted frequencies, overcoming the broadband nature of clicks that primarily assesses high-frequency regions. These techniques are essential for evaluating frequency-specific , particularly in populations unable to provide behavioral responses, such as infants. Two primary approaches are tone-burst ABR and (derived-band) ABR, both of which enhance frequency resolution while maintaining the characteristics of ABR. Tone-burst ABR employs brief tone pips, typically at frequencies such as 500 Hz, 1000 Hz, 2000 Hz, or 4000 Hz, to elicit responses from specific cochlear regions. To minimize spectral splatter and transient artifacts, stimuli are shaped using a Blackman window with rise-fall times of 2-5 ms, resulting in a duration of 5-10 ms overall. Wave V latencies in tone-burst ABR are generally 1-2 ms longer than those elicited by clicks due to the delayed onset of the tone envelope and reduced neural synchrony at lower frequencies. Stimuli are presented at rates of 10-20 per second, often with alternating to reduce artifacts, and thresholds are determined by identifying the lowest intensity yielding a replicable wave V. Correction factors, typically 10-20 , are applied to convert ABR thresholds (measured in dB nHL) to estimated behavioral thresholds, accounting for the tone-burst spectrum's effective intensity. The stacked ABR, or derived-band technique, improves frequency specificity by isolating responses through of stimuli. It involves recording ABRs to high-pass filtered clicks at varying cutoff frequencies (e.g., 500, 1000, 2000 Hz), deriving responses by subtracting adjacent filtered waveforms, and then temporally aligning and summing wave V peaks to enhance . This method particularly boosts sensitivity at low frequencies like 500 Hz, where standard tone-bursts may lack robustness due to poorer neural phase-locking. Stimuli cover 0.5-4 kHz, with similar correction factors applied as in tone-burst ABR. These methods demonstrate 80-90% correlation with behavioral pure-tone thresholds for mild-to-moderate , with stronger agreement for high-frequency sloping audiograms where click ABR may overestimate low-frequency function. A of over 1200 cases across 32 studies confirmed that tone-burst ABR thresholds predict behavioral levels within 10-15 for 2000-4000 Hz, though accuracy decreases slightly at lower frequencies. Stacked ABR similarly correlates well, offering advantages in detecting subtle low-frequency deficits. However, limitations include higher inter-subject variability at low frequencies (standard deviations up to 10-15 ), attributed to reduced response and neural synchrony, necessitating extended averaging of 3000 or more epochs to achieve reliable detection. This increases test time compared to click ABR, limiting clinical efficiency in some settings.

Auditory Steady-State Response

The auditory steady-state response (ASSR) is a periodic electrophysiological response elicited by rapidly repeating or continuously auditory stimuli, reflecting sustained neural activity phase-locked to the stimulus , typically in the and cortical regions. Unlike transient evoked potentials, ASSR detects steady-state neural following to periodic signals, such as - or - tones at rates like 40 Hz, as first demonstrated in seminal work showing robust responses to such modulations in adults with normal hearing. Methodologically, ASSR involves presenting pure-tone carriers from 500 Hz to 8000 Hz, modulated in (e.g., 100% depth) or frequency (e.g., ±5-10%), often simultaneously across multiple frequencies to both ears using systems like the Interacoustics . Responses are analyzed in the via , with significance determined by statistical methods such as the (p < 0.05) or coherence measures, enabling threshold estimation in 10-25 minutes for bilateral testing. Compared to traditional auditory brainstem response (ABR), ASSR offers superior frequency resolution due to narrow-band stimuli (approximately 1/4 bandwidth), allowing precise threshold estimation across octaves, and supports multifrequency testing that reduces overall examination time by up to 50%. It estimates unaided behavioral thresholds within 10-15 dB for frequencies from 250 Hz to 8000 Hz, providing more objective detection through automated statistical validation. In clinical practice, ASSR is particularly useful for pediatric diagnostics of flat or severe-to-profound hearing losses, where it correlates strongly (r = 0.89-0.95) with behavioral thresholds, facilitating early . It also aids mapping by evaluating residual hearing with modulated stimuli, helping optimize programming in infants and young children. However, ASSR is less sensitive to brainstem lesions, such as those in auditory neuropathy spectrum disorder, and requires a quiet environment, as responses can be influenced by attention or transient noise.

Recent Innovations in ABR Analysis

Recent innovations in auditory brainstem response (ABR) analysis have leveraged and (AI/ML) techniques to automate detection and enhance diagnostic precision, addressing limitations in traditional manual interpretation. models, such as convolutional neural networks (CNNs), have been developed for objective ABR detection, with multicenter validation studies demonstrating high accuracy in identifying responses across diverse datasets. For instance, a 2025 comparative analysis of nine models reported robust generalizability, achieving detection rates suitable for clinical deployment in varied populations. Similarly, bidirectional (BiLSTM) networks have enabled automatic recognition of ABR characteristic s, reducing clinician workload by accurately classifying peaks like Waves I, III, and V from raw signals, with performance validated on datasets spanning different ages and hearing statuses. The open-source Auditory Brainstem Response Analyzer (ABRA) toolbox represents a significant advancement in automated ABR processing, integrating for waveform labeling, estimation, and / extraction via a user-friendly graphical interface. Released in updated form in 2025, ABRA standardizes analysis by employing CNN-based models to detect and annotate ABR components, facilitating reproducible results in and clinical settings without dependencies. This tool has been particularly valuable for batch-processing large datasets, improving efficiency in studies of auditory function. Innovations in stimulus paradigms have extended ABR applicability to more naturalistic scenarios, notably through speech-derived methods that extract responses from continuous natural speech rather than isolated clicks. Developed since , these techniques use algorithms to isolate subcortical responses from ongoing speech stimuli, allowing assessment of real-world auditory processing, including frequency-specific encoding in low-frequency ranges. A 2025 study comparing derivation methods confirmed their reliability in listeners, enabling evaluation of neural synchronization to complex acoustic inputs without disrupting . To objectively measure auditory , recent protocols employ ABR elicited by -in-noise () stimuli, where statistical detection quantifies the minimum detectable silent interval. A 2025 methodology introduced a reliable ABR-based test using template-matching and response detection statistics, correlating closely with behavioral gap detection limits and offering utility in populations unable to provide subjective reports, such as infants or those with neurological impairments. This approach enhances ABR's role in diagnosing central timing deficits. ABR metrics have emerged as biomarkers for broader neurodevelopmental and cognitive outcomes, particularly in vulnerable groups. In aging populations, Wave V amplitude from ABR correlates with cognitive performance, independent of age and effects, as evidenced by 2024 data from human cohorts and complementary studies linking subcortical responses to executive function decline. For intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) infants, 2025 evaluations revealed prolonged ABR latencies indicative of early auditory pathway immaturity, supporting timely interventions to mitigate long-term developmental risks.

References

  1. [1]
    Auditory Brainstem Response - StatPearls - NCBI Bookshelf
    Jan 12, 2023 · Auditory brainstem response (ABR), or brainstem auditory Evoked Potentials (BAEP), is an objective measurement of auditory pathway function from the auditory ...Continuing Education Activity · Introduction · Indications · Technique or Treatment
  2. [2]
    BAER - brainstem auditory evoked response - MedlinePlus
    May 2, 2024 · Brainstem auditory evoked response (BAER) is a test to measure the brain wave activity that occurs in response to sounds such as clicks or certain tones.
  3. [3]
  4. [4]
    Auditory Brainstem Response Audiometry - Medscape Reference
    Feb 28, 2024 · Auditory brainstem response (ABR) audiometry is a neurologic test of auditory brainstem function in response to auditory (click) stimuli.
  5. [5]
    Sources of auditory brainstem responses revisited: Contribution by ...
    Auditory brainstem responses provide diagnostic value in pathologies involving the early parts of the auditory pathway. Despite that, the neural generators ...Missing: review | Show results with:review
  6. [6]
    Latency and Interpeak Interval Values of Auditory Brainstem ...
    Absolute latency and interpeak values from ABR showed earlier responses in women, faster than international standards suggest. The responses were similar to ...Missing: IV | Show results with:IV
  7. [7]
    Auditory Brainstem Response Testing: Stimulus Rate Revisited
    Nov 20, 2006 · Typically for a rate increase from 7.7/s to 57.7/s, wave V latency increases of less than 0.6-0.8 msec have been reported in normal young adult ...
  8. [8]
    Multichannel recordings of the human brainstem frequency ...
    It is well-known for example, that ABR responses are susceptible to contamination from myogenic (e.g., post-auricular muscle) or other EEG interferences ...
  9. [9]
    Effect of the Level of Anesthesia on the Auditory Brainstem ...
    Anesthesia is known to affect the auditory brainstem response in some species including mice, rats and lizards [15–20]. However, there is no report concerning ...
  10. [10]
    Jewett, D. and Williston, J.S. (1971) Auditory-Evoked Far ... - Scirp.org.
    Jewett, D. and Williston, J.S. (1971) Auditory-Evoked Far Fields Averaged from the Scalp of Humans. Brain, 94, 681-696.Missing: 1967 discovery original
  11. [11]
    Long-Term Evolution of Brainstem Electrical Evoked Responses to ...
    This study aimed to assess the top-down control of sound processing in the auditory brainstem of rats. Short latency evoked responses were analyzed after ...
  12. [12]
  13. [13]
    Electrocochleography and Auditory Brainstem Electric Responses in ...
    Teas DC, Eldredge DH, Davis H. Cochlear responses to acoustic transients: An interpretation of whole nerve action potentials. J Acoust Soc Am 1962; 34: 1438–89.
  14. [14]
    Some early uses of evoked brain responses in investigations of ...
    May 11, 2009 · Dawson's automatic time-domain signal averager, a hybrid mechanical/electronic device, provided a convenient means for recording average ...
  15. [15]
    (PDF) Brainstem auditory-evoked response in dogs - ResearchGate
    Aug 6, 2025 · PDF | On Jan 1, 2006, Wayne J Wilson and others published Brainstem auditory-evoked response in dogs | Find, read and cite all the research ...
  16. [16]
    Hearing threshold in preterm and term infantsby auditory brainstem ...
    Hearing thresholds were established in preterm and term newborn infants by auditory brainstemresponses in the first week of life. The presence of wave V was ...
  17. [17]
    Joint Committee on Infant Hearing position statement 1982 - PubMed
    Joint Committee on Infant Hearing position statement 1982. Ear Hear. 1983 Jan-Feb;4(1):3-4. doi: 10.1097/00003446-198301000-00003.
  18. [18]
  19. [19]
    ALGO-2 NEWBORN HEARING SCREENER (K936039) - FDA Browser
    Information about Cleared 510(K) - ALGO-2 NEWBORN HEARING SCREENER (K936039) ... NATUS MEDICAL, INC. Country: United States. FDA Decision: Substantially ...
  20. [20]
    [PDF] Joint Committee on Infant Hearing 1990 Position Statement
    Because moderate to severe sensorineura! hearing loss can be confirmed in 2.5% to 50% of neonates manifesting any of the previously published risk criteria,.
  21. [21]
    Universal Infant Hearing Screening by Automated Auditory ...
    Feb 1, 1998 · At initial diagnostic testing, all the infants had moderate or greater ABR thresholds; their audiometric test results shifted as they grew ...
  22. [22]
    Increase the proportion of newborns who get screened for hearing ...
    95.0 percent of newborns aged 1 month and under were screened for hearing loss in 2017. See detailed data for this objective.Missing: 2010 ABR
  23. [23]
    Year 2007 Position Statement: Principles and Guidelines for Early ...
    Oct 1, 2007 · NICU infants admitted for more than 5 days are to have auditory brainstem response (ABR) included as part of their screening so that neural ...<|separator|>
  24. [24]
    [PDF] Guidelines for the Audiologic Assessment of Children From Birth to 5 ...
    Moreover, the assessment guidelines were developed pursuant to screening guidelines (ASHA, 1989) and the Joint Committee on Infant. Hearing (JCIH) 1990 Position ...Missing: comatose | Show results with:comatose
  25. [25]
    Combined OAE and AABR Approach for Newborn Hearing Screening
    Oct 26, 2015 · Figure 1. List of newborn risk factors for hearing loss from the 1982 Joint Committee on Infant Hearing. Universal Newborn Hearing Screening.
  26. [26]
    [PDF] Normative data for neurodiagnostic Auditory Brainstem Response ...
    May 4, 2009 · The ABR is used as a neurodiagnostic tool to detect retrocochlear pathologies of the auditory system, such as space occupying lesions, tumors, ...
  27. [27]
    Auditory brainstem response: Key parameters for good-quality ...
    Auditory brainstem response (ABR) is one element in electrophysiological exploration of hearing, providing an objective assessment of auditory function. The ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  28. [28]
    [PDF] AUDITORY BRAINSTEM RESPONSE (ABR) PROTOCOL
    This is done to reduce/remove contamination by the post-auricular muscle response ... polarity), for assessment of cochlear microphonic potentials (CM), cochlear ...
  29. [29]
    Good Practices in Auditory Brainstem Response, Part 1 - Article 827
    Jun 13, 2011 · Proper proximity placement of electrodes and stimulus transducer box in both chair and table positions. Note that the electrode wires are ...
  30. [30]
    [PDF] Auditory Brainstem Response (ABR) testing for Post-newborn and ...
    If the artefact rejection level is >±5 µV see Fig 1. Display scales. Within range 25-100 nV ≡ 1 ms. See equipment specific settings. Display. Wave V up. Table 3 ...
  31. [31]
    Understanding Standard Procedure in Auditory Brainstem Response
    Oct 10, 2024 · Abstract. The auditory brainstem response (ABR) is a noninvasive test that measures neural activity in response to auditory stimuli.
  32. [32]
  33. [33]
    Auditory brain stem response for objective measures of hearing
    This article discusses a technique, termed Fsp, which adds objectivity to ABR threshold detection by creating a ratio of signal plus averaged background noise.
  34. [34]
    Protocol for Rapid, Accurate, Electrophysiologic, Auditory ...
    For the ABR, the FSP/FMP response detection algorithm meets these criteria. Described initially more than 30 years ago (Don et al16; Elberling and Don19), the ...
  35. [35]
    Evoked Potentials Part 1: Good Practice and Auditory Brainstem ...
    Oct 1, 2018 · This course describes Auditory Brainstem Response testing. Test parameters, waveform identification and diagnostic techniques are reviewed.
  36. [36]
    Evoked Brain Stem Auditory Response - ScienceDirect.com
    In normal newborns, the latency of wave V will decrease by 0.24 to 0.44 ms for each 10 dB in sound intensity between 70 and 110 dB. In children with conductive ...
  37. [37]
    Threshold Auditory Brainstem Response (ABR) Testing | Interacoustics
    Sep 5, 2025 · In this article, you'll learn about the auditory brainstem response (ABR), its morphology, how to identify wave V, and much more.Missing: artifact | Show results with:artifact
  38. [38]
    The auditory brain stem response I-V amplitude ratio in ... - PubMed
    Results indicated that amplitude ratios of less than 1.00 seldom occurred in the normal or cochlear ears.Missing: wave value
  39. [39]
    [PDF] Objective measures for detecting the auditory brainstem response
    ABR template to all epochs within the ensemble. The ensemble size N took ... detection time of various objective ABR detection methods. With respect to ...
  40. [40]
    [PDF] Objective Detection of Auditory Brainstem Responses Using a ...
    The bootstrap method is based on randomly resampling (with replacement) the original data and gives an estimate of the probability that the response obtained is ...
  41. [41]
    Brainstem Auditory Evoked Potentials in infants aged 1 to 24 months ...
    Oct 21, 2020 · Authors state that this process of maturation occurs until 18 to 20 months of age, when latency values pair with those of adults (3,11,18,19).
  42. [42]
    Age-Related Maturation of Wave V Latency of Auditory Brainstem ...
    Sep 1, 2016 · Wave V latency decreased rapidly in early childhood, became slower after 3 years of age and completely matured by 12 years of age.
  43. [43]
    Using click-evoked auditory brainstem response thresholds in ...
    Click-evoked ABR testing is a reliable tool to cautiously estimate behavioral PTA thresholds at the average of frequencies of 1–4 and 2–4 kHz.Missing: formula | Show results with:formula
  44. [44]
    The auditory brainstem response (ABR) - Basicmedical Key
    Apr 10, 2017 · The latency of wave V is about 5.9 ms at 70 dBnHL and increases to about 7.7 ms at 20 dBnHL, thus giving an average shift in wave V slope of 30– ...The Auditory Brainstem... · Generators Of The Abr · Normative Characteristic Of...
  45. [45]
    Occasional finding of neurological disorders during children hearing ...
    Lack of all the waves in an ear with hearing loss below 70 dB (arithmetic average of psychoacoustic thresholds in the frequencies from 2 to 4 KHz). The rigorous ...
  46. [46]
    The Auditory Brainstem Responses in Patients with Unilateral ...
    The cause of the changes in ABR testing on retrocochlear pathologies is the signal decrease caused by hearing loss. I–V IPL measurement is often used in the ...
  47. [47]
    Auditory brainstem evoked responses and temperature monitoring ...
    The latencies of ABRs increased and amplitudes decreased with cooling (P < 0.01), but rewarming reversed these effects. The ABR threshold temperature as ...
  48. [48]
    Effect of Middle Ear Fluid on Sound Transmission and Auditory ... - NIH
    The click and pure tone ABRs were recorded as the middle ear fluid increased. Fluid introduction reduced mobility of the TM, incus and RWM mainly at high ...
  49. [49]
    Objective assessment of frequency-specific hearing thresholds in ...
    ABR thresholds were compared to the ASSR thresholds at 2 kHz, since the spectrum of the click stimulus contains most energy at frequencies around 2 kHz.
  50. [50]
    [PDF] Year 2019 Position Statement: Principles and Guidelines for Early ...
    Newborn Screening​​ An endorsement, for well-born infants only, who are screened by automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) and do not pass, that ...
  51. [51]
    Auditory Brainstem Responses to Bone-Conducted Brief Tones in ...
    ABR-Based Sensorineural versus ... differentiate normal versus elevated cochlear sensitivity in infants with conductive or sensorineural hearing loss.
  52. [52]
    Air and Bone Conduction Frequency-specific Auditory Brainstem ...
    There is an air-bone gap in conductive hearing loss, which are greater or equal than 15dB (decibel). This gap is not observed in sensorioneural hearing loss.Missing: sloping | Show results with:sloping
  53. [53]
    Sensitivity of the Automated Auditory Brainstem Response in ...
    Sep 1, 2015 · Hearing loss >45 dB HL, which is considered to be in the range of moderate to profound severity, was diagnosed in 36% of the infants in this ...
  54. [54]
    Thresholds for auditory brain stem responses to tones in notched ...
    Results: ABR thresholds for the infants with bilateral normal hearing were 23.6, 12.9, and 12.6 dB nHL for 500, 2000 and 4000 Hz, respectively. Most (92 to 100 ...
  55. [55]
    [PDF] Frequency-Specific ABR and ASSR Threshold Assessment in ...
    ABR/ASSR threshold accuracy (and thus the estimated behavioral hearing level accuracy) is affected by proce- dural factors, including recording time (longer ...
  56. [56]
    Intra-Operative Cochlear Nerve Function Monitoring in Hearing ...
    Dec 15, 2022 · In this review, we aim to describe the pros and cons of the following cochlear nerve monitoring techniques: ABRs (auditory brainstem responses), DENM (direct ...
  57. [57]
    Intraoperative Monitoring for Hearing Preservation and Restoration ...
    The present article reports on our experience with hearing preservation during 158 acoustic neuroma (AN) operations via the retrosigmoid-transmeatal (RS-TM) ...
  58. [58]
  59. [59]
    [PDF] Guideline-11C.pdf - American Clinical Neurophysiology Society
    Conclusions. BAEP monitoring is often used to limit injury to the auditory system during surgery. A latency prolongation of 1 ms and amplitude decrement of 50% ...
  60. [60]
    Diagnostic accuracy of intraoperative brainstem auditory evoked ...
    This meta-analysis evaluated the diagnostic value of intraoperative brainstem auditory evoked potential (BAEP) for predicting post-operative hearing loss.
  61. [61]
    Recent Advances in Intraoperative Brainstem Auditory Evoked ... - NIH
    Aug 22, 2023 · We attempt to obtain a pure waveform by removing artifacts from the patient under examination using an 8–10 Hz stimulation rate, where the ...Missing: epochs | Show results with:epochs
  62. [62]
    Fitting Infant Hearing Aids: ABR Measurements ... - The ASHA Leader
    The most appropriate strategy for estimating hearing thresholds in young infants is the use of frequency-specific auditory brainstem response (ABR) procedures.Missing: verification | Show results with:verification
  63. [63]
    Correction Factor Evaluation and Between-System Comparison of ...
    Sep 11, 2024 · Corrected ABR thresholds predicted behavioral thresholds in infants to within 1.77 dB (range of mean values across frequency: 1.18–2.26 dB) on ...Missing: formula | Show results with:formula
  64. [64]
    Using ABR Thresholds in Pediatric Hearing Aid Fittings.
    Dec 3, 2007 · Under- or over-amplification can result if the correction is applied twice or not at all. Therefore, it is ultimately the clinician's ...
  65. [65]
    A Predictive Model for Cochlear Implant Outcome in Children With ...
    Feb 4, 2019 · We found that preoperative ABR and area ratio of VCN to FN at the cerebellopontine angle could predict CI outcome in patients with CND.
  66. [66]
    Electrically evoked auditory brainstem response in cochlear ...
    May 31, 2022 · The E-ABR detection threshold can be used to estimate a patient's T levels [78,79,80]. Also, Mittal et al. (2015) conducted a study on 75 ...
  67. [67]
    Mapping of pediatric cochlear implant recipients using electrical ...
    Conclusion: t‑EABR was found to be more correlated with T levels than with C levels, and it was always between T and C levels. KEYWORDS: Cochlear implants, ...
  68. [68]
    Prognostic value of electrically evoked auditory brainstem ...
    Electric ABR as a predictor of speech perception outcome in cochlear implanted children ... predict the speech perception outcome after cochlear implantation.<|control11|><|separator|>
  69. [69]
    [PDF] Objective Measures at Different Stages of Cochlear Implantation
    Jan 31, 2025 · The electrically evoked auditory brainstem response parameters (thresholds, amplitude growth function, slope) are influenced by intact neurons ...
  70. [70]
    Auditory Neuropathy Spectrum Disorders: From Diagnosis to ...
    Its diagnosis is in part based on evidence of altered neural processing such abnormal auditory brainstem responses (ABRs), with a reduced or absent wave V, ...
  71. [71]
    Short-term outcomes of infants with hyperbilirubinemia-associated ...
    ANSD caused by hyperbilirubinemia may be transient, with most infants improving or recovering hearing by 12 months of age.
  72. [72]
    Auditory Brainstem Responses in Children with ... - Thieme Connect
    This study provides supportive evidence for the value of click-evoked ABRs in comprehensive auditory processing assess- ment batteries. Key Words: auditory ...
  73. [73]
    Differences Among Elderly Patients Having Asymmetric ...
    Sep 18, 2024 · Abnormalities in ABR were considered significant if (1) the difference in interaural interpeak latencies of wave V exceeded 0.4 milliseconds, ...
  74. [74]
    Assessing Auditory Processing in Children with Listening Difficulties
    Jan 23, 2023 · Studies have primarily shown prolonged latency of click-evoked auditory brainstem response (ABR) in children with or at risk of APD, especially ...
  75. [75]
    Clinical Utility of Evoked Potentials - Medscape Reference
    Oct 25, 2019 · The response to BAEP studies is variable in cases of brainstem stroke; some lesions cause abnormal latencies, and some do not (eg, negative BAEP ...
  76. [76]
    The pattern of auditory brainstem response wave V maturation in ...
    Changes in EABR wave V latency over the first 2 years of cochlear implant use were found to be well fitted by the sum of two decaying exponential functions ...Missing: growth | Show results with:growth
  77. [77]
    [PDF] Auditory brainstem activity and development evoked by apical ...
    Consistent stimulation from either end of the implanted array did promote developmental plasticity of the auditory brainstem, as shown in Figs. 6 and 7, by ...
  78. [78]
    Developmental Plasticity in the Human Auditory Brainstem - PMC
    These results suggest that the human auditory system exhibits developmental plasticity, in both frequency and time domains, for sounds that are composed of ...
  79. [79]
    Auditory brainstem responses as a biomarker for cognition - Nature
    Dec 19, 2024 · The neural generators of the ABR are also well described, with wave I being from the auditory nerve, and wave V from the lateral lemniscus ...
  80. [80]
    Review The Middle Latency Response - Thieme Connect
    A consistently absent MLR combined with a normal or near normal ABR, good hearing sensitivity, and a suggestive history can be a strong indicator of central.Missing: insensitive | Show results with:insensitive
  81. [81]
    The Parallel Auditory Brainstem Response - PMC - NIH
    ... normative data. In addition, these studies have focused on clicks, rather ... 6.5 ms, 4000 and 8000 Hz: 5 ms; Stapells, 2011). That period contained ...
  82. [82]
    Relationship between pure tone audiometry and tone burst auditory ...
    Then they underwent tone burst ABR using Blackman windowed stimuli at 0.5 kHz and 1 kHz. Results were compared with PTA threshold. Mean threshold ...
  83. [83]
    Tone Burst Stimulus for Auditory Brainstem Responses - PubMed
    After PTA each subject underwent tone-burst ABR test at 1kHz using a linear gated (L_ABR) or Blackman windowed (B_ABR) stimuli with (nn_ABR) and without ...
  84. [84]
    Latency of tone-burst-evoked auditory brain stem responses ... - NIH
    At mid-frequencies, frequency dependence of ABR and TBOAE latencies were similar. The dependence of ABR latency on both rise time and level was significant; ...
  85. [85]
    The impact of degree of hearing loss on auditory brainstem ... - NIH
    Apr 3, 2025 · The current study evaluated the relationship between ABR and behavioral thresholds in infants and children over a range of hearing thresholds.Missing: specificity | Show results with:specificity
  86. [86]
    Successful detection of small acoustic tumors using the stacked ...
    The new measure is the wave V amplitude of a stacked ABR constructed by temporally aligning wave V of each derived-band ABR and then summing the time-shifted ...
  87. [87]
    Interaural Stacked Auditory Brainstem Response Measures for ... - NIH
    ... derived-band ABR waveforms. By temporally aligning the peak activity ... Stacked ABR system, are specific to the data collection techniques and ...
  88. [88]
    Stacked tone-burst-evoked auditory brainstem response (ABR)
    First, the TB-stacked ABR (wave V) was compared to that obtained using derived narrowband masked ABRs in young normal-hearing subjects. Second, the TB ...
  89. [89]
    [PDF] Threshold Estimation by the Tone-Evoked Auditory Brainstem ...
    Results for 2000 and 4000 Hz are somewhat better: 6 to 8~/o with no ABR at maximum stimulus levels show behav- ioural thresholds of 90 dB HI. or better while 6% ...
  90. [90]
    Air and Bone Conduction Click and Tone-burst Auditory Brainstem ...
    Auditory Brainstem Response (ABR) is an electrophysiological measure used to predict hearing sensitivity in infants for whom reliable behavioral thresholds ...
  91. [91]
    Auditory Steady-State Response - StatPearls - NCBI Bookshelf
    Oct 28, 2023 · However, unlike ABR, ASSR allows for simultaneous multifrequency testing, shortening the duration of the examination. ABR testing requires the ...
  92. [92]
  93. [93]
    The Auditory Steady-State Response and the Relationship between ...
    Jul 26, 2024 · The ASSR is a periodic electrophysiological response, which occurs as a result of an auditory stimulus presented at a frequency rate fast enough ...
  94. [94]
    Next-Generation Auditory Steady-State Responses in Normal ...
    Jul 10, 2023 · The advantages of the ASSR over the tone burst ABR includes completely objective detection of responses and shorter overall test time due to ...
  95. [95]
    Auditory Steady-State Response (ASSR): A Beginner's Guide
    Picton et al6 provided tables of corrective values indicating that ASSR thresholds are within 10 dB to 15 dB of audiometric thresholds. There are variances ...Missing: resolution | Show results with:resolution
  96. [96]
    Comparison of Auditory Steady-State Responses With Conventional ...
    Jul 3, 2022 · This study provides some evidence to suggest that ASSR can be a valuable tool for estimating objective frequency-specific hearing thresholds in older adults.
  97. [97]
    (PDF) Hearing Evaluation for Pediatric Cochlear Implant with ASSR
    Aug 6, 2025 · Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate Auditory Steady-State Responses (ASSR) at high intensities in pediatric cochlear implant ...
  98. [98]
    Comparison of Deep Learning Models for Objective Auditory ...
    Jun 3, 2025 · Comparison of Deep Learning Models for Objective Auditory Brainstem Response Detection: A Multicenter Validation Study. Yin Liu, Lingjie ...
  99. [99]
    Automatic Recognition of Auditory Brainstem Response ... - Frontiers
    The ABR waveform usually has a range of interwave latency, and its potential in microvolts is recorded. Normal ABR usually has five peaks visible, i.e., waves I ...
  100. [100]
    An Open-Source Deep Learning-Based Toolbox for Automated ...
    Sep 23, 2025 · Here, we introduce Auditory Brainstem Response Analyzer (ABRA), a novel suite of open-source ABR analysis tools powered by deep learning, which ...
  101. [101]
    Comparing methods for deriving the auditory brainstem response to ...
    In this study, we analyzed EEG recordings from subjects listening to both unaltered natural speech and synthesized “peaky speech.” We compared the derived ABR ...2.1. Eeg Dataset · 2.3. Abr Derivation · 3. Results
  102. [102]
    Objective measures of auditory temporal resolution with ABR
    Apr 12, 2025 · To develop a reliable objective method to measure temporal resolution thresholds using Auditory Brainstem Response (ABR) with statistical response detection ...
  103. [103]
    Auditory Brainstem Response in Intrauterine Growth Restriction
    The purpose of this study was to evaluate the auditory brainstem response (ABR) of infants with asymmetric intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) in response ...Missing: intervention | Show results with:intervention
  104. [104]
    Ultraflexible electrode arrays for months-long high-density ... - NIH
    Oct 3, 2022 · ... signal to noise ratio (SNR) of 5.51. The representative recording performance and individual variations in unit yield, amplitude and SNR are ...