4.5.2(3). Auditieve ‘Evoked Potentials’ van hogere centra
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

4.5.2.1(3) Elektrische en magnetische brainmapping en bronanalyse

Wanneer de over het schedeloppervlak gemeten elektrische potentiaalverdeling (c.q. de magnetische veldverdeling) wordt gecombineerd met een fysische beschrijving van het hoofd als driedimensionale volumegeleider (met gegeven geometrie en elektrische geleidbaarheden) is het mogelijk om een kwantitatieve schatting te maken van de plaats, de sterkte en de ruimtelijke oriëntatie van de onderliggende fysiologische (stroom)bron. De laatste wordt daarvoor conceptueel gereduceerd tot een dipool die equivalent is met het totaal aan werkelijke fysiologische activiteit. In de vectorcardiografie vindt men een soortgelijke benaderingen. De procedures hiervoor zoals ontwikkeld door Scherg (Scherg en von Cramon, 1985, 1986) worden momenteel op veel plaatsen gebruikt. Dit type bronanalyse kent in beginsel twee toepassingen, te weten fundamenteel onderzoek naar de neurale generatoren van verschillende responscomponenten zoals van MLR, LLR, MMN, P300, etc en het lokaliseren van laesies aan de hand van brainmaps van deze responsies.

Voor toepassing van ‘brainmapping’ bij ABR zie o.a. Grandori, 1986), bij MLR zie o.a. Kraus en McGee, 1988 en bij P300 zie o.a. Baran et al., 1988. Voor verdere informatie over brain mapping en bronanalyse wordt verwezen naar overzichtsliteratuur zoals verschenen in Grandori et al. (1990) en Hoke en Bock (1991).

In Fig.1 wordt op een fraaie wijze de nauwkeurigheid in plaats en tijd van MEG vergeleken met die van enkele andere afbeeldingstechnieken. Tevens is aangegeven de mate waarin de methode invasief is.

Fig.1.Vergelijking van de nauwkeurigheden in tijd en plaats van enkele afbeeldingstechnieken. Tevens is aangegeven de mate waarin de methode invasief is. IEEG staat voor Inracraniele EEG en MRS is Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (werkt op een manier die vergelijkbaar is met MRI). Een magnetische veldsterkte van 1 femtotesla is gelijk aan 10-15 T(esla).

 

Literatuur

  1. Anderer P, Pascual-Marqui R, Semlitsch H, Saletu B. Differential effects of normal aging on sources of standard N1, target N1 and target P300 auditory event-related brain potentials revealed by low resolution electromagnetic tomography (LORETA). Electroencephal Clin Neurophysiol 1998;108:160-174.
  2. Baran JA, Musiek FE, Long RR, Ommaya A. Topographic mapping of brain electrical activity in the assessment of central auditory nervous system pathology. Am J Otol 1988;9(Suppl):72-76.
  3. Barlow HB, Mollon JD. ‘The Senses’. Cambridge University Press, 1982.
  4. Beynon AJ, Electrically-evoked auditory cortical event-related potentials in cochlear implants – The P300 potential. Proefschrift Universiteit St-Radboud, Nijmegen, 2005.
  5. Burkard R, Shi Y, Hecox KE. A comparison of maximum length and Legendre sequences for the derivation of brainstem auditory evoked responses at rapid rates of stimulation. J. Acoust Soc Am 1990;87:1656-1664.
  6. Burkard RF, Don M, Eggermont JJ (Eds). ‘Auditory Evoked Potentials. Basic Principles and clinical application’. Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins. Baltimore, 2007.
  7. Ceponiene R, Rinne T, Näätänen R. Maturation of cortical sound processing as indexed by event-related potentials. Clin Neurophysiol 2002;113:870-882.
  8. Crowley KE, Colrain IM. A review of the evidence for P2 being an independent component process: Age, sleep and modality. Clin Neurophysiol 2004;115:732-744.
  9. Deiber MP, Ibanez V, Fischer C, Ferrin F, Mauguiere F. Sequential mapping favours the hypothesis of distinct generators for Na and Pa middle latency auditory evoked potentials. Electroencephal Clin Neurophysiol 1988;71:187-188.
  10. Friesen LM, Tremblay KL. Acoustic change complexes (ACC) recorded in adult cochlear implant listeners. Ear Hear 2006;27:678-685.
  11. Grandori F. Field analysis of auditory evoked brainstem potentials. Hear Res 1986;21:51-58.
  12. Grandori F, Hoke M, Romano G.L (Eds). Auditory evoked magnetic fields and electrical potentials. Adv Audiol, Vol. 6, Karger, Basel, 1990.
  13. Hall JW. Handbook of auditory evoked responses. Allyn and Bacon, Needham Heights, Mass, 1992
  14. Hayes EA, Warrier CM, Nicol TG, et al. Neural plasticity following auditory training in children with learning problems. Clin Neurophysiol 2003;114:673-684.
  15. Hoke M, Bock G (Eds). Magnetic and electrical activity of the auditory cortex. Acta Otolaryngol, Suppl 491, 1991.
  16. Hyde M. The N1 response and its applications. Audiol Neurootol 1997;2:281-307.
  17. Jasper HH. The ten-twenty electrode system of the International Federation. Electroencephal Clin Neurophysiol 1958;10:371-375.
  18. Kathmann N, Frodl-Bauch T, Hegerl U. Stability of the mismatch negativity under different stimulus and attention conditions. Clin Neurophysiol 1999;110:317-323.
  19. Knight RT, Hillyard SA, Woods DL, Nevilee HJ. The effects of frontal and parietal lesions on the auditory evoked potential in man. Electroencephal Clin Neurophysiol 1980;50:112-114.
  20. Kraus N, McGee T. Color imaging of the human middle latency response. Ear Hear 1988;9:159-167.
  21. Korczak PA, Kurtzberg D, Stapells DR. Effects of sensorineural hearing loss and personal hearing aids on cortical event-related potential and behavioral measures of speech-sound processing. Ear Hear 2005;26:l65-185.
  22. Martin BA, Boothroyd A. Cortical, auditory, evoked potentials in response to changes of spectrum and amplitude. J Acoust Soc Am 2000;107:2155-2161.
  23. Martin BA, Shafer VL, Morr ML, et al. Maturation of mismatch negativity: A scalp current density analysis. Ear Hear 2003;24:463-471.
  24. Morr ML, Shafer VL, Kreuzer JA, Kurtzberg D. Maturation of mismatch negativity in typically developing infants and preschool children. Ear Hear 2002;23:118-136.
  25. Näätänen R, Gaillard AWK, Mäntysalo S. Early selective-attention effect on evoked potential reinterpreted. Acta Psychologica 1978;42:313-329.
  26. Näätänen R. The role of attention in auditory information processing as revealed by event-related potentials and other brain measures of cognitive function. Behav Brain Sci 1990;13:201-288.
  27. Näätänen R. ‘Attention and Brain Function’. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1992.
  28. Näätänen R. Memory traces for words as revealed by the Mismatch Negativity (MMN). NeuroImage 2001;14:107-616.
  29. Näätänen R, Pakarinen S, Rinne T, Takegata R. The mismatch negativity (MMN): towards the optimal paradigm. Clin Neurophysiol 2004;115:140-144.
  30. Novitski N, Tervaniemi M, Huotilainen M, Näätänen R. Frequency discrimination at different frequency levels as indexed by electrophysiological and behavioral measures. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res 2004;20:26-36.
  31. Oates PA, Kurtzberg D, Stapells DR. Effects of sensorineural hearing loss on cortical event-related potential and behavioral measures of speech-sound processing. Ear Hear 2002;23:309-4 15.
  32. Ostroff JM, Martin BA, Boothroyd A. Cortical evoked responses to spectral change within a syllable. Ear Hear 1998;19:290-297.
  33. Picton TW, Hillyard SA, Krausz HI, Galambos R. Human auditory evoked potentials I: evaluation of components. Electroencephal Clin Neurophysiol. 1974a;36:179-190.
  34. Picton TW, Hillyard SA, Krausz HI, Galambos R. Human auditory evoked potentials I: effects of attention. Electroencephal Clin Neurophysiol. 1974b;36:191-200.
  35. Picton TW, Stuss DT. Event-related potentials in the study of speech and language: a critical review. In ‘Biological perspectives on language’, edited by Caplan D, Lecours AC, Smith A. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. 1984, pp. 303-360.
  36. Picton TW (Ed). ‘Handbook of electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology, Vol. 3: Human event-related potentials’ Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1988.
  37. Picton TW, Alain C, Otten L, et al. Mismatch negativity: Different water in the same river. Audiol Neurootol 2000;5:111-139.
  38. Picton TW, Bentin S, Berg P, et al. Guidelines for using human event-related potentials to study cognition: Recording standards and publication criteria. Psychophysiology 2000;37:127-152.
  39. Ponton CW, Don M. The mismatch negativity in cochlear implant users. Ear Hear 1995;16:131-146.
  40. Ponton CW. Don M, Eggermont JJ et al. Maturation of human cortical auditory function: Differences between normal-hearing children and children with cochlear implants. Ear Hear 1996;17:430-437.
  41. Ponton CW, Eggermont JJ, Don M et al. Maturation of the mismatch negativity: Effects of profound deafness and cochlear implant use. Audiol Neurootol 2000:5:167-185.
  42. Ponton CW, Eggermont JJ, Kwong B, Don M. Maturation of human central auditory system activity: Evidence from multichannel evoked potentials. Clin Neurophysiol 2000;111:220-223.
  43. Ponton C, Vasama JP, Tremblay K, et al. Plasticity in the adult human central auditory system: Evidence from late-onset profound unilateral deafness. Hear Res 2001;154:32-44.
  44. Ponton CW, Eggermont JJ, Khosla D, et al. Maturation of human central auditory system activity: Separating auditory evoked potentials by dipole source modeling. Clin Neurophysiol 2002:113:407-420.
  45. Portmann M, Dauman R, Duries F, Portmann D, Dhillon R. Modern diagnostic strategy for acoustic neuromas. Arch Otorhinolaryngol 1989;246:286-291.
  46. Praamstra P. ‘Central auditory function and auditory language processing’. PhD Thesis, University of Nijmegen, 1992.
  47. Pulvermüller F, Kujala T, Shtyrov Y, Simola J, Tiitinen H, Alku P, Alho K, Martinkauppi S, Ilmoniemi RJ, Näätänen, R. Memory Traces for words as revealed by the Mismatch Negativity (MMN). Neuroimage 2001;14:606-616.
  48. Pulvermüller F, Shtyrov Y, Ilmoniemi RJ, Marslen-Wilson W. Tracking speech comprehension in space and time. Neuroimage 2006;31:1297-1305.
  49. Sams M, Aulanko R, Aaltonen A, Näätänen R. Event-related potentials to infrequent changes in synthesized phonetic stimuli. J Cognit Neurosci 1990:2:344-357.
  50. Scherg M, von Cramon D. A new interpretation of the generators of BAEP waves I-V: Results of a spatio-temporal dipole model. Electroencephal Clin Neurophysiol 1985;62:290-299.
  51. Scherg M, von Cramon D. Evoked dipole source potentials of the human auditory cortex. Electroencephal Clin Neurophysiol 1986;65:344-360.
  52. Scherg M, von Cramon D. Dipole source potentials of the auditory cortex in normal subjects and in patients with temporal lobe lesions. Adv Audiol (Karger, Basel) 1990;6:165-193.
  53. Shafer VL, Morr ML, Kreuzer JA, Kurtzberg D. Maturation of mismatch negativity in school-age children. Ear Hear 2000;21:242-251.
  54. Sharma A, Dorman MF, Spahr A. A sensitive period for the development of the central auditory system in children with cochlear implants: Implications for age of implantation. Ear Hear 2002;23:532-539.
  55. Sharma A, Martin K, Roland P, et al. P1 latency as a biomarker for central auditory development in children with hearing impairment. Am Acad Audiol 2005;16:564-573.
  56. Shtyrov Y, Osswald K, Pulvermüller F. Memory traces for words in the brain are indexed by the mismatch negativity (MMN) responses: fMRI evidence, Neuroimage 2006;31,116.
  57. Squires KC, Hecox KE. Electrophysiological Evaluation of Higher Level Auditory Processing. Seminars in Hearing 1983;4:422.
  58. Stapells DR. Cortical event-related potentials to auditory stimuli. In: Katz J, ed. Handbook of Clinical Audiology, 5th ed. Philadelphia: Williams & Wilkins, 2002;378-405.
  59. Takeshita K, Nagamine T, Thuy DHD, et al. Maturation change of parallel auditory processing in school-aged children revealed by simultaneous recording of magnetic and electric cortical responses. Clin Neurophysiol 2002;113:1470-1484.
  60. Tervaniemi M, Lehtokoski A, Sinkkonen J, et al. Test-retest reliability of mismatch negativity for duration, frequency and intensity changes. Clin Neurophysiol 1999;110:1388-1393.
  61. Trainor LJ, Shahin A, Roberts LE. Effects of musical training on the auditory cortex in children. Ann NY Acad Sci 2003;999:506-513.
  62. Tremblay K, Kraus N, McGee T, et al. Central auditory plasticity: Changes in the N1-P0complex after speech-sound training. Ear Hear 2001;22:79-90.
  63. Tremblay KL, Kraus N. Beyond the ear: Central auditory plasticity. Oto-Rhino-Laringologica 2002:52:93-100.
  64. Tremblay KL, Friesen L, Martin BA, Wright R. Test-retest reliability of cortical evoked potentials using naturally produced speech sounds. Ear Hear 2003;24:225-232.
  65. Tremblay KL, Billings CJ. Friesen LM. Souza PE. Neural representation of amplified speech-sounds. Ear Hear 2006;27:93-103.
  66. Welling DB, Glasscock ME, WCI et al. Acoustic neuroma: a cost effective approach. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1990;103:364-370.
  67. Wood CC, Wolpaw JR. Scalp distribution of human auditory evoked potentials II: Evidence for overlapping sources and involvement of auditory cortex. Electroencephal Clin Neurophysiol 1987;54:25-38.
  68. Woods DL, Clayworth CC, Knight RT, Simpson GV, Naeser MA. Generators of middle- and long- latency auditory evoked potentials: Implications from studies of patients with bitemporal lesions. E1ectroenceph Clin Neurophysiol 1987;68:132-148.
  69. Wunderlich JL, Cone-Wesson BK. Maturation of CAEP in infants and children: A review. Hear Res 2006;212:212-223.
  70. Wunderlich JL, Cone-Wesson BK, Shepherd R. Maturation the cortical auditory evoked potential in infants and young children. Hear Res 2006;212:185-202.

Auteur

Lamoré

Revisie

januari 2009