4.6 Article

Sub-optimal function of the auditory brainstem in term infants with transient low Apgar scores

Journal

CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY
Volume 118, Issue 5, Pages 1088-1096

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2007.01.018

Keywords

hypoxia; perinatal brain damage; neonatal auditory abnormality; auditory brainstem evoked response; evoked potentials; maximum length sequence; Apgar score

Funding

  1. Wellcome Trust Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: To assess functional integrity of the auditory brainstem in neonates with transient low Apgar scores. Methods: Forty-two term infants were studied with brainstem auditory evoked response (BAER) using the maximum length sequence during the first month of life. All had transient low Apgar scores but no clinical signs of hypoxic-ischaemic encephalopathy (HIE). Results: The latencies of BAER waves I and III in these infants were similar to those of age-matched normal controls at all click rates (91/s, 227/s, 455/s and 910/s) during the period studied. Wave V latency was increased at 910/s on day 1 (P < 0.01), but did not differ from that in the controls on any other days. I-V interval was increased significantly at 455/s and 910/s on day 1 (P < 0.01 and 0.001) and day 3 (P < 0.05 and 0.01). On days 5 and 7, BAER wave latencies and intervals were similar to those in the controls. On day 30, all latencies and intervals reached the values in the controls. No abnormalities were seen in BAER wave amplitude variables on any days. Conclusions: Neonates with transient low Apgar scores but without HIE had a significant increase in I-V interval at very high click rates on the first three days of life. Significance: Brainstem auditory function is sub-optimal during the first few days in neonates with transient low Apgar scores. (c) 2007 International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available