Search

Introduction: Universal newborn hearing screening has been successfully implemented in many places around the world, and it is recommended that cases with risk factors for hearing loss be followed-up regardless of hearing screening results. However, there is a need for clarity regarding the recommended rate of follow-up and which tests should be performed. The aim of this study was to assess the audiologic follow-up program for the group with risk factors. Method: Our retrospective study involved children of various ages with a risk factor for hearing loss who passed the initial neonatal hearing test but were later diagnosed with hearing loss. Out of 113,708 children born at Hadassah University Medical Center during the years 2013–2021, 6763 were at risk of hearing loss, and their follow-up audiologic test results were studied. Results: Audiologic testing including ABR, OAE, tympanometry and behavioral audiometry was performed in 1534 of 6763 (23%) of the risk factor group that returned to the hospital. In total, 73 children (4.7%) were diagnosed with hearing loss, 54 of whom failed the initial screening and 19 who had passed it. Further examination of the children that passed the initial screening and were later diagnosed with a hearing loss revealed that four cases had been missed in screening (one familial mild hearing loss, one familial progressive loss, one premature infant with a high tone loss, and one NICU graduate with CNS involvement). Another nine cases had late-onset hearing loss (three meningitis, five CMV, and one with a mitochondrial disease). An additional six cases were diagnosed late, and the age of onset of the hearing loss was unknown (two intubated, two with hydrocephalus, one with Cerebral Palsy, and one with general developmental delay). Conclusions: These results reveal the importance of implementing a refined protocol for monitoring hearing in the high-risk group of children that pass neonatal hearing screening with respect to which hearing tests should be conducted, at what age, and the duration of follow-up. Also, barriers to follow-up must be dealt with, and parents should be more involved in the monitoring process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Air and bone conduction thresholds are used to differentiate between conductive and sensori-neural hearing losses because bone conduction is thought to bypass the conductive apparatus, directly activating the inner ear. However, the suggested bone conduction mechanisms involve the outer and middle ears. Also, normal bone conduction thresholds have been reported in cases of lesions to the conduction pathway. Therefore, further investigation of bone conduction mechanisms is required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background A major cause of the hearing loss following exposure to intense noise involves release of free radicals resulting from the elevated metabolism. The free radicals induce damage to several of the components of the cochlear amplifier including the outer hair cells and indirectly to the transduction currents. Salicylic acid induces a reversible hearing loss since it binds to the motor protein prestin in the outer hair cells, reducing electromotility. Furosemide also induces a reversible hearing loss since it reduces the endocochlear potential which is a major component of the cochlear transduction currents. On the other hand, each of these drugs also provides protection from a noise induced hearing loss if they are injected just before a noise exposure, probably as a result of the decreased metabolism induced in their presence, with release of lower levels of free radicals. In this study, both drugs were administered in order to assess whether their protective effects would be additive. Methods The study was conducted on normal hearing albino mice of the Sabra strain. They were injected with either salicylic acid alone (N = 11), or furosemide alone (N = 14), or both together (N = 14), or with saline control (N = 11) and exposed to broad band noise for 3.5 hours. An additional group of 9 mice was injected with both salicylic acid and furosemide, but not exposed to noise. The degree of the resulting hearing loss was assessed by recording thresholds of the auditory nerve brainstem evoked responses to broad band clicks before the injections and noise, and 7, 14 and 21 days after. Results The noise induced hearing loss in the mice injected with salicylic acid alone or furosemide alone was smaller than in those injected with saline, i.e. these drugs provided protection, as in previous studies in this laboratory. There was no threshold elevation after two weeks in the mice injected with both drugs without noise exposure, i.e. the effects of the two drugs given together was reversible. On the other hand, there was a significant hearing loss (i.e. threshold elevation) in the group which received both drugs and was also exposed to noise, with mean threshold elevations of 38.8 ± 19.0 dB and 28.3 ± 11.7 dB 7 days after noise exposure. Conclusions This result is very surprising, if not paradoxical. Drugs which provide protection from a noise induced hearing loss when administered alone, not only do not provide protection when given together, but also induce a greater hearing loss when accompanied by noise. This observation may be related to the finding that the depression of the endocochlear potential normally caused by furosemide is reduced in the presence of salicylic acid, so that the protection usually provided by furosemide is not present when it is administered together with salicylic acid. Thus it seems that each drug may interfere with the protective action of the other when coupled with noise.

Abstract Background The permanent hearing loss following exposure to intense noise can be due either to mechanical structural damage (tearing) caused directly by the noise or to metabolic (biochemical) damage resulting from the elevated levels of free radicals released during transduction of the sound overstimulation. Drugs which depress active cochlear mechanics (e.g. furosemide and salicylic acid) or anti-oxidants (which counteract the free radicals) are effective in reducing the threshold shift (TS) following broadband continuous noise. This study was designed to determine whether furosemide can reduce the TS following exposure to impulse noise, similar to its action with continuous broadband noise. Methods Shortly after furosemide injection, mice were exposed to simulated M16 rifle impulse noise produced by different loudspeakers and amplifiers in different exposure settings and, in other experiments, also to actual M16 rifle shots. Results Depending on the paradigm, the simulated noises either did not produce a TS, or the TS was reduced by furosemide. The drug was not effective in reducing TS resulting from actual impulse noise. Conclusion Simulated M16 rifle impulse noise may not truly replicate the rapid rise time and very high intensity of actual rifle shots so that the TS following exposure to such noise can be reduced by these drugs. On the other hand, actual M16 impulse noise probably causes direct (frank) mechanical damage, which is not reduced by these drugs.

Abstract Background The ability of drugs to reduce noise induced hearing loss (NIHL) has been evaluated in diverse experimental conditions (animal species, noise intensities, durations, assessment techniques, etc), making it difficult to assess their relative efficacy. The present study was designed to provide more uniform comparisons and to allow to a better understanding of the mechanism of the NIHL. Methods: The drugs studied included furosemide (loop diuretic) and the antioxidants N Acetyl-L-Cysteine, vitamins A, C, E with the vasodilator magnesium. Mice were exposed to a continuous broadband noise (113 dB SPL for 3.5 hours) and the NIHL was assessed in all animals before noise exposure and 1 week after with auditory nerve brainstem evoked responses (ABR) to broadband clicks and to 8 kHz tone bursts. Results Each of the drugs alone and in combination led to similar reductions in NIHL. Conclusions The loop diuretic furosemide, by reducing the magnitude of the endocochlear potential in scala media, probably depressed active vibrations of the outer hair cells and basilar membrane, resulting in reduction of free radical formation during the noise exposure. The antioxidants N Acetyl-L-Cysteine and vitamins A, C, E with the vasodilator magnesium presumably counteract the free radicals. Thus, the administration of the antioxidants to animals in which free radical formation had already been reduced by previous injection of furosemide did not have an additional protective effect on the NIHL.