• 1.

    Strain GM. Deafness in dogs and cats. 2009. Available at: www.lsu.edu/deafness/deaf.htm. Accessed Dec 5, 2009.

  • 2.

    Platt S, Freeman J, di Stefani A, et al. Prevalence of unilateral and bilateral deafness in border collies and association with phenotype. J Vet Intern Med 2006; 20:13551362.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3.

    Coppens AG, Gilbert-Gregory S, Steinberg SA, et al. Inner ear histopathology in “nervous Pointer dogs” with severe hearing loss. Hear Res 2005; 200:5162.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    Sockalingam R, Filippich L, Charles B, et al. Cisplatin-induced ototoxicity and pharmacokinetics: preliminary findings in a dog model. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2002; 111:745750.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5.

    Holliday TA, Nelson HJ, Williams DC, et al. Unilateral and bilateral brainstem auditory-evoked response abnormalities in 900 Dalmatian dogs. J Vet Intern Med 1992; 6:166174.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6.

    Heffner HE. Hearing in large and small dogs: absolute thresholds and size of the tympanic membrane. Behav Neurosci 1983; 97:310318.

  • 7.

    Little CJ, Lane JG. An evaluation of tympanometry, otoscopy, and palpation for assessment of the canine tympanic membrane. Vet Rec 1989; 124:58.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Penrod JP, Coulter DB. The diagnostic uses of impedance audiometry in the dog. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1980; 16:941948.

  • 9.

    Cole LK, Podell M, Kwochka KW. Impedance audiometric measurements in clinically normal dogs. Am J Vet Res 2000; 61:442445.

  • 10.

    Wilson WJ, Mills PC. Brainstem auditory-evoked response in dogs. Am J Vet Res 2005; 66:21772187.

  • 11.

    Wilkes MK, Palmer AC. Congenital deafness and vestibular deficit in the Doberman. J Small Anim Pract 1992; 33:218224.

  • 12.

    Strain GM, Merchant SR, Neer TM, et al. Ototoxicity assessment of a gentamicin sulfate otic preparation in dogs. Am J Vet Res 1995; 56:532538.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13.

    Mills PC, Ahlstrom L, Wilson WJ. Ototoxicity and tolerance assessment of a TrisEDTA and polyhexamethylene biguanide ear flush formulation in dogs. J Vet Pharmacol Ther 2005; 28:391397.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14.

    Fischer A, Obermaier G. Brainstem auditory-evoked potentials and neuropathologic correlates in 26 dogs with brain tumors. J Vet Intern Med 1994; 8:363369.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15.

    Steiss JE, Cox NR, Hathcock JT. Brain stem auditory-evoked response abnormalities in 14 dogs with confirmed central nervous system lesions. J Vet Intern Med 1994; 8:293298.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16.

    Marshall AE. Brain stem auditory-evoked response of the non-anesthetized dog. Am J Vet Res 1985; 46:966973.

  • 17.

    Ter Haar G, Venker-van Haagen AJ, de Groot HN, et al. Click and low-, middle-, and high-frequency toneburst stimulation of the canine cochlea. J Vet Intern Med 2002; 16:274280.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18.

    Poncelet LC, Coppens AG, Deltenre PF. Audiograms estimated from brainstem tone-evoked potentials in dogs from 10 days to 1.5 months of age. J Vet Intern Med 2002; 16:674679.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    Shiu JN, Munro KJ, Cox CL. Normative auditory brainstem response data for hearing threshold and neuro-otological diagnosis in the dog. J Small Anim Pract 1997; 38:103107.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20.

    Sims MH, Moore RE. Auditory-evoked response in the clinically normal dog: early latency components. Am J Vet Res 1984; 45:20192027.

  • 21.

    Uzuka Y, Fukaki M, Hara Y, et al. Brainstem auditory evoked responses elicited by tone-burst stimuli in clinically normal dogs. J Vet Intern Med 1998; 12:2225.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22.

    Strain GM. Aetiology, prevalence and diagnosis of deafness in dogs and cats. Br Vet J 1996; 152:1736.

  • 23.

    Strain GM, Green KD, Twedt AC, et al. Brain stem auditory evoked potentials from bone stimulation in dogs. Am J Vet Res 1993; 54:18171821.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24.

    Cook LB. Neurologic evaluation of the ear. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 2004; 34:425435.

  • 25.

    Markessis E, Poncelet L, Colin C, et al. Auditory steady-state evoked potentials (ASSEPs): a study of optimal stimulation parameters for frequency-specific threshold measurement in dogs. Clin Neurophysiol 2006; 117:17601771.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26.

    Bright KE. Spontaneous otoacoustic emissions in populations with normal hearing sensitivity. In: Robinette MS, Glattke TJ, eds. Otoacoustic emissions clinical applications. 3rd ed. New York: Thieme Publishers, 2007; 6986.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27.

    Coppens AG, Resibois A, Poncelet L. Bilateral deafness in a Maltese Terrier and a Great Pyrenean puppy: inner ear morphology. J Comp Pathol 2000; 122:223228.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 28.

    Strain GM. Congenital deafness and its recognition. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 1999; 29:895907.

  • 29.

    Coppens AG, Kiss R, Heizmann CW, et al. An original inner ear neuroepithelial degeneration in a deaf Rottweiler puppy. Hear Res 2001; 161:6571.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 30.

    Sims MH, Brace JJ, Arthur DA, et al. Otoacoustic emission in a dog. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1991; 198:10171018.

  • 31.

    Rogers RK, Thelin JW, Sims MH, et al. Distortion-product otoacoustic emissions in dogs. Prog Vet Neurol 1995; 6:4549.

  • 32.

    Sims MH, Rogers RK, Thelin JW. Transiently evoked otoacoustic emissions in dogs. Prog Vet Neurol 1994; 5:4956.

  • 33.

    Sockalingam R, Filippich L, Sommerlad S, et al. Transientevoked and 2F1–F2 distortion product oto-acoustic emissions in dogs: preliminary findings. Audiol Neurootol 1998; 3:373385.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 34.

    Arnold SA. The auditory brainstem response. In: Roeser RJ, Valente M, Hosford-Dunn H, eds. Audiology diagnosis. 2nd ed. New York: Thieme, 2007;426442.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 35.

    Salata JA, Jacobson JT, Strasnick B. Distortion-product otoacoustic emissions hearing screening in high-risk newborns. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1998; 118:3743.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 36.

    McFadden D, Pasanen EG, Raper J, et al. Sex differences in otoacoustic emissions measured in rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta). Horm Behav 2006; 50:274284.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 37.

    Torre P III, Cruikshanks KJ, Nondahl DM, et al. Distortion product otoacoustic emission response characteristics in older adults. Ear Hear 2003; 24:2029.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 38.

    Arnold DJ, Lonsbury-Martin BL, Martin GK. High-frequency hearing influences lower-frequency distortion-product otoacoustic emissions. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1999; 125:215222.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 39.

    Ter Haar G, Venker-van Haagen AJ, van den Brom WE, et al. Effects of aging on brainstem responses to toneburst auditory stimuli: a cross-sectional and longitudinal study in dogs. J Vet Intern Med 2008; 22:937945.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 40.

    Sawada S, Mori N, Mount RJ, et al. Differential vulnerability of inner and outer hair cell systems to chronic mild hypoxia and glutamate ototoxicity: insights into the cause of auditory neuropathy. J Otolaryngol 2001; 30:106114.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 41.

    Varga R, Avenarius MR, Kelley PM, et al. OTOF mutations revealed by genetic analysis of hearing loss families including a potential temperature sensitive auditory neuropathy allele. J Med Genet 2006; 43:576581.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 42.

    Prieve BA. Otoacoustic emissions in neonatal hearing screening. In: Robinette MS, Glattke TJ, eds. Ototacoustic emissions clinical applications. 3rd ed. New York: Thieme Publishers, 2007;343364.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 43.

    Johnson JL, White KR, Widen JE, et al. A multicenter evaluation of how many infants with permanent hearing loss pass a two-stage otoacoustic emissions/automated auditory brainstem response newborn hearing screening protocol. Pediatrics 2005; 116:663672.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 44.

    Musiek FE, Baran JA, Pinheiro ML. Chapter 6: Subcortical and insular lesions. Neuroaudiology case studies. San Diego: Singular Publishing Group, 1994;113142.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 45.

    Gorga MP, Neely ST, Ohlrich B, et al. From laboratory to clinic: a large scale study of distortion-product otoacoustic emissions in ears with normal hearing and ears with hearing loss. Ear Hear 1997; 18:440455.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 46.

    Boege P, Janssen T. Pure-tone threshold estimation from extrapolated distortion product otoacoustic emission I/O-functions in normal and cochlear hearing loss ears. J Acoust Soc Am 2002; 111:18101818.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 47.

    Johnson TA, Neely ST, Kopun JG, et al. Distortion product otoacoustic emissions: cochlear-source contributions and clinical test performance. J Acoust Soc Am 2007; 122:35393553.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 48.

    Stover L, Gorga MP, Neely ST, et al. Toward optimizing the clinical utility of distortion product otoacoustic emission measurements. J Acoust Soc Am 1996; 100:956967.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 49.

    Gorga MP, Neely ST, Bergman B, et al. Otoacoustic emissions from normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects: distortion product responses. J Acoust Soc Am 1993; 93:20502060.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 50.

    Brown AM. Acoustic distortion from rodent ears: a comparison of responses from rats, guinea pigs and gerbils. Hear Res 1987; 31:2537.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 51.

    Harris FP, Lonsbury-Martin BL, Stagner BB, et al. Acoustic distortion products in humans: systematic changes in amplitude as a function of f2/f1 ratio. J Acoust Soc Am 1989; 85:220229.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 52.

    Whitehead ML, Lonsbury-Martin BL, Martin GK. Evidence for two discrete sources of 2f1-f2 distortion-product otoacoustic emission in rabbit. II: differential physiological vulnerability. J Acoust Soc Am 1992; 92:26622682.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 53.

    Gorga MP, Johnson TA, Kaminski JR, et al. Using a combination of click- and tone burst-evoked auditory brain stem response measurements to estimate pure-tone thresholds. Ear Hear 2006; 27:6074.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Advertisement

Evaluation of otoacoustic emissions in clinically normal alert puppies

View More View Less
  • 1 Division of Laboratory Animal Health, College of Veterinary Medicine, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849.
  • | 2 Department of Communication Disorders, College of Liberal Arts, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849.
  • | 3 Department of Communication Disorders, College of Liberal Arts, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849.
  • | 4 Department of Communication Disorders, College of Liberal Arts, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849.
  • | 5 Department of Communication Disorders, College of Liberal Arts, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849.
  • | 6 Division of Laboratory Animal Health, College of Veterinary Medicine, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849.

Abstract

Objective—To evaluate distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) measurements in puppies with normal hearing.

Animals—23 clinically normal 7.5-to 10.5-week-old puppies.

Procedures—A cross-sectional study was performed. The DPOAE measurements were obtained with a commercially available distortion product otoacoustic measurement system and were performed in a quiet, non-sound-attenuated room. All measurements were obtained from alert puppies and were repeated 1 or 2 times to ensure that the measurements were replicable. Results that were a minimum of 8 dB higher than the noise floor were accepted. Values from the first trial in which emissions were obtained at all test frequencies were used for analysis.

Results—Otoacoustic emission measurements were easily obtained, robust, reliable, and consistent with auditory brainstem response and behavioral results.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Hearing screening in alert puppies can be accomplished reliably and rapidly with otoacoustic emissions testing. Results supported the possibility of the use of DPOAE measurement in hearing screening of dogs.

Abstract

Objective—To evaluate distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) measurements in puppies with normal hearing.

Animals—23 clinically normal 7.5-to 10.5-week-old puppies.

Procedures—A cross-sectional study was performed. The DPOAE measurements were obtained with a commercially available distortion product otoacoustic measurement system and were performed in a quiet, non-sound-attenuated room. All measurements were obtained from alert puppies and were repeated 1 or 2 times to ensure that the measurements were replicable. Results that were a minimum of 8 dB higher than the noise floor were accepted. Values from the first trial in which emissions were obtained at all test frequencies were used for analysis.

Results—Otoacoustic emission measurements were easily obtained, robust, reliable, and consistent with auditory brainstem response and behavioral results.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Hearing screening in alert puppies can be accomplished reliably and rapidly with otoacoustic emissions testing. Results supported the possibility of the use of DPOAE measurement in hearing screening of dogs.

Contributor Notes

Dr. Cellino's present address is Columbus Speech and Hearing Center, 2424 Double Churches Rd, Columbus, GA 31909.

Dr. Quiller's present address is 1001 Meadowlands Trail, Calabash, NC 28467.

Address correspondence to Dr. Blumsack (blumsjt@auburn.edu).