Tinnitus in the elderly is prevalent and impacts quality of life

Tinnitus is common among elderly Nigerians and associated with treatable health conditions like otitis media, rhinosinusitis, head injury and hypertension, according to new research published in the October 2010 issue of Otolaryngology — Head and Neck Surgery.

Nearly 36 million Americans, however, suffer from tinnitus or head noises. It may be an intermittent sound or an annoying continuous sound in one or both ears. In Nigeria, tinnitus affects between 10.1% and 33% of the population, with about 3 to 4% consulting a doctor on at least one occasion in their lifetime. Its effect makes it a significant contributor to morbidity in the elderly.

The study included face-to-face interviews of 1,302 elderly people aged 65 years and over; age, sex, economic status or residence were not associated with the occurrence of tinnitus. The researchers found a significant difference between the prevalence of tinnitus among "young elderly" subjects aged 65-69 (6.5%), and the older (80+ years) group (41.9 %). Also in this study, a non-significant trend was observed for the prevalence of tinnitus to increase with decreasing socioeconomic and educational level.

"Our results are of potential value in the overall consideration of the health consequence of aging in this setting, especially given the projections of a rapid increase in the proportion of the elderly in developing countries," said study author Akeem Olawale Lasisi, MBChB, FWACS, FMCORL.

In spite of its public health significance, tinnitus among the elderly has received poor research attention in Sub-Saharan Africa where, with relatively poor access to health service, etiologically important medical conditions that would otherwise be readily treated could become chronic and increase vulnerability to tinnitus. In this study, the authors focused on subjective tinnitus; in selecting risk factors to study, they speculated that the presence of chronic recurrent rhinosinusitis may lead to eustachian tube dysfunction, hence middle ear pressure dysregulation and tinnitus. In addition, chronic medical conditions predisposing to arteriosclerosis have been considered as correlates because when untreated or complicated (as often found in this area), they might lead to hypoperfusion of the cochlear and dysregulation of inner ear fluid dynamics, which could then cause tinnitus. Furthermore, control of these risk factors may help in ameliorating tinnitus and improving quality of life, which would be a significant benefit to the majority of the elderly.

Hooked on headphones? Personal listening devices can harm hearing, study finds

Personal listening devices like iPods have become increasingly popular among young — and not-so-young — people in recent years. But music played through headphones too loud or too long might pose a significant risk to hearing, according to a 24-year study of adolescent girls.

The study, which appears online in the Journal of Adolescent Health, involved 8,710 girls of lower socioeconomic status, whose average age was about 16. Their hearing was tested when they entered a residential facility in the U.S Northeast.

"I had the rare opportunity, as an audiologist, to see how this population changed over the years," said Abbey Berg, Ph.D., lead study author and a professor in the Department of Biology & Health Sciences at Pace University in New York.

In this period, high-frequency hearing loss — a common casualty of excessive noise exposure — nearly doubled, from 10.1 percent in 1985 to 19.2 percent, she found.

Between 2001, when testers first asked about it, and 2008, personal music player use rose fourfold, from 18.3 percent to 76.4 percent. High-frequency hearing loss increased from 12.4 percent to 19.2 percent during these years, while the proportion of girls reporting tinnitus — ringing, buzzing or hissing in the ears — nearly tripled, from 4.6 percent to 12.5 percent.

Overall, girls using the devices were 80 percent more likely to have impaired hearing than those who did not; of the teens reporting tinnitus, all but one (99.7 percent) were users.

However, "just because there's an association, it doesn't mean cause and effect," Berg said. For the girls who took part in the study, other aspects of their lives — poverty, poor air quality, substance abuse, risk-taking behavior — might Sadd to the effects of noise exposure.

"This paper offers compelling evidence that the inappropriate use of headphones is indeed affecting some people's hearing, and the number of 'some people' is not small," said Brian Fligor, director of diagnostic audiology at Children's Hospital Boston.

The level of impairment detected in this study might have been relatively subtle "but the point is that it is completely avoidable," said Fligor, who has no affiliation with the study.

"The ear is going to be damaged throughout your lifetime; what we're seeing here resembles early onset age-related hearing loss — you might think of it as prematurely aging the ear," he said.

"I don't demonize headphones," said Fligor, who encourages moderation, not prohibition. At a reasonable volume — conversational or slightly louder — there's little risk, he said: "It's when you start overworking the ear that you get problems."

Berg said her findings suggest the need for more effective educational efforts to reduce unsafe listening behavior, particularly among disadvantaged youth. "You have to target them at a much younger age, when they are liable be more receptive," she said.


Journal Reference:

  1. Berg AL, Serpanos YC. High frequency hearing sensitivity in adolescent females of low socioeconomic status over a 24-year period. J Adol Health, online, 2010

New Norwegian earplug solution to a deafening problem

 Some 600 cases of noise-induced hearing impairment are reported by the Norwegian petroleum industry every year. A new, intelligent earplug is now set to alleviate the problem.

Norway's largest company, Statoil ASA, is taking the problems associated with noise exposure seriously. Over the course of four years the international energy company has led efforts to further develop an existing combined hearing protection and communication product for use on offshore platforms.

World's most advanced hearing protection device

A microphone on the outside of the new "offshore" version of the QUIETPRO earplug picks up ambient sounds. The sound is digitally processed, and unwanted loud noises are filtered out before the sound is sent to a speaker inside the earplug. Users can adjust the level of ambient sound, as desired.

A microphone on the inside of the earplug picks up speech signals through the skull. This means that users do not have to have a microphone in front of their mouth, as is the case with the ear protection devices currently used on most offshore platforms. Another advantage is that the microphone inside the ear does not pick up background noise in the way that a microphone in front of the mouth does.

The QUIETPRO hearing protection and communication device was originally developed for military use by the Trondheim-based company Nacre AS, which has its origins in Scandinavia's largest independent research organisation, SINTEF. The company's customers include the United States Army, which uses QUIETPRO devices in armoured vehicles, among other applications.

More energy and increased safety

"The new hearing protection device enables employees to preserve a lot of energy," explains Asle Melvær, noise specialist at Statoil, who initiated and is responsible for the R&D project Offshore Safety for Hearing and Verbal Communication (SoHot). The project receives funding under the Research Council of Norway's Large-scale Programme for Optimal Management of Petroleum Resources (PETROMAKS).

"Users of the new device do not have to strain to hear what is being said over the radio, and the noise reduction system in the earplug means that the level of sound is adapted to the surrounding environment. On board an oil platform understanding messages transmitted by radio can be a matter of life and death," states Mr Melvær.

The earplug also alerts the user if it is not inserted into the ear correctly, providing additional safety.

New generation soon to be tested

The hearing protection device was tested in 2009 on the helicopter landing pad at the Oseberg Field Centre outside Bergen. Starting in December 2010 the next generation of devices will be tested both there and at the Snorre oilfield a little further north.

"One important feature of the new version is a built-in noise dose meter that emits a warning signal before any damage to hearing has occurred — which is quite unique," explains an enthusiastic Asle Melvær. "This function will make it possible for us to withdraw personnel from hazardous noise areas before they have been exposed to noise levels that can damage their hearing."

The new earplug is explosion-proof and can be used anywhere on the platform.

Important initiative

"It is wonderful to be able to play a role in the development of new technology that will undoubtedly reduce the number of cases of hearing damage among employees in the petroleum industry," says Mr Melvær. "Nevertheless, it is important to emphasise that the development of better hearing protection must not become an excuse for failing to implement measures to reduce noise levels. This should still be given first priority," he states.

Research Council supports HSE projects

The PETROMAKS programme is responsible for the Research Council's health, safety and environment-related (HSE) activities within the petroleum sector. "Efforts to develop a new version of the QUIETPRO earplug provide a good example of the type of creative projects that exist in this field that make use of technology and system solutions across sectors," explains Tor-Petter Johnsen, Adviser for the PETROMAKS programme.

"Close cooperation between advanced Norwegian technology groups and highly skilled customers in the petroleum industry has not only led to the development of a new product but has also provided better insight into the serious health risks to which employees in the industry are exposed," Mr Johnsen concludes.

Prevalence of hearing loss among US adolescents has increased significantly, study finds

Data from two nationally representative surveys indicates that the prevalence of hearing loss among U.S. adolescents increased by about 30 percent from 1988-1994 to 2005-2006, with 1 in 5 adolescents having hearing loss in 2005-2006, according to a study in the August 18 issue of JAMA.

Hearing loss is a common sensory disorder, affecting tens of millions of individuals of all ages in the United States. Adolescent hearing loss, although common, is not well understood, and can have important educational and social implications, according to background information in the article. Some risk factors, such as loud sound exposure from listening to music, may be of particular importance to adolescents.

Josef Shargorodsky, M.D., M.P.H., of Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, and colleagues examined 2 comparable databases to evaluate whether there has been a change in the prevalence of hearing loss and to assess characteristics of hearing impairment in the 12-to 19-year-old age group. The databases were the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III), 1988-1994, and NHANES 2005-2006. NHANES III examined 2,928 participants and NHANES 2005-2006 examined 1,771 participants, ages 12 to 19 years. Audio-metrically determined hearing loss was categorized as either unilateral or bilateral for low frequency (0.5,1, and 2 kilohertz [kHz]) or high frequency (3,4,6, and 8 kHz), and as slight loss (greater than 15 to less than 25 decibels [dB]) or mild or greater loss (25 dB or greater) according to hearing sensitivity in the worse ear.

An analysis of the data indicated that the prevalence of any hearing loss among 12- to 19-year olds was 14.9 percent in 1988-1994 and 19.5 percent (approximately 6.5 million individuals) in 2005-2006, representing a 31 percent increase in the prevalence of hearing loss over this time. The majority of hearing loss was slight. The prevalence of any unilateral hearing loss was 11.1 percent in 1988-1994 and 14.0 percent in 2005-2006, and any bilateral hearing loss was 3.8 percent and 5.5 percent, respectively. Any high-frequency hearing loss (prevalence, 12.8 percent in 1988-1994; prevalence, 16.4 percent in 2005-2006) was more common than any low-frequency hearing loss (prevalence, 6.1 percent in 1988-1994; prevalence, 9.0 percent in 2005-2006) in both survey cycles.

The prevalence of mild or worse hearing loss was significantly higher in NHANES 2005-2006 than in the 1988-1994 cycle, representing a 77 percent increase. Females were significantly less likely than males to demonstrate any hearing loss in 2005-¬2006. Histories of 3 or more ear infections, firearm use, and loud noise exposure for 5 or more hours in a week were not significantly associated with any hearing loss in 2005-2006. Individuals from families below the federal poverty threshold had significantly higher odds of hearing loss than those above the threshold.

"The prevalence of hearing loss among a sample of U.S. adolescents aged 12 to 19 years was greater in 2005-2006 compared with 1988-1994. Further studies are needed to determine reasons for this increase and to identify potential modifiable risk factors to prevent the development of hearing loss," the authors conclude


Journal Reference:

  1. Shargorodsky et al. Change in Prevalence of Hearing Loss in US Adolescents. JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association, 2010; 304 (7): 772 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2010.1124

Prolonged mobile phone use may be linked to tinnitus

Regularly using a mobile phone for at least four years seems to be associated with a doubling in the risk of developing chronic tinnitus (persistent ringing/roaring/hissing in the ear), indicates a small study published online in Occupational and Environmental Medicine.

The prevalence of chronic tinnitus is increasing, and is currently around 10 to 15% in the developed world, say the authors. There are currently few treatment options.

And while there are some obvious triggers, such as ear disorders and head trauma, there are few known risk factors or clear explanations for this trend. The high microwave energy produced by mobile phones during use has been suggested as a possible culprit, but there has been no hard evidence to date.

The authors compared 100 patients who required treatment for chronic tinnitus, defined as lasting at least three months, with 100 randomly selected people without the disorder, but matched for age and sex, over a period of a year (2003-4).

Any patient with ear disease, noise induced impaired hearing, high blood pressure, or who was on medication known to boost the risk of tinnitus was excluded from the study.

All participants were then quizzed about the type of phone they used, and where, as mobile phone output tends to be stronger in rural areas. They were also asked about the intensity and duration of calls, ear preference, and use of hand held devices.

Most tinnitus was one sided, with the left side accounting for 38 cases. A similar number of patients described it as distressing 'most of the time.' More than one in four (29%) also had associated vertigo.

Virtually all the participants were mobile users, but only 84 patients and 78 in the comparison group were using a mobile when symptoms first appeared. Some 17 patients and 12 of their peers had been using a mobile for less than a year at that time.

Analysis of the results showed that the patients who had used a mobile before the onset of tinnitus were 37% more likely to have the condition than those in the comparison group. Those who used their mobiles for an average of 10 minutes a day were 71% more likely to have the condition.

Most people used their phones on both ears, and those who had used a mobile for four years or more were twice as likely to have tinnitus compared with those in the comparison group.

The authors accept that people are likely to over/underestimate their mobile phone usage and the length of calls. But they caution: "Considering all potential biases and confounders, it is unlikely that the increased risk of tinnitus from prolonged mobile phone use obtained in this study is spurious."

They suggest that there is a plausible explanation for a potential link between mobile phones and tinnitus as the cochlea and the auditory pathway directly absorb a considerable amount of energy emitted by a mobile.


Journal Reference:

  1. H.-P. Hutter, H. Moshammer, P. Wallner, M. Cartellieri, D.-M. Denk-Linnert, M. Katzinger, K. Ehrenberger, M. Kundi. Tinnitus and mobile phone use. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 2010; DOI: 10.1136/oem.2009.048116

New drug restores hearing after noise-induced hearing loss in rats

Researchers from the University of Auckland, New Zealand, have discovered that a potent new drug restores hearing after noise-induced hearing loss in rats. The landmark discovery found that injection of an agent called 'ADAC', activates adenosine receptors in cochlear tissues, resulting in recovery of hearing function.

The finding paves the way for effective non-surgical therapies to restore hearing loss after noise-induced injury. Dr. Srdjan Vlajkovic and his team's work1 is published in a special edition of Springer's journal Purinergic Signalling, focusing on the inner ear.

Hearing loss from noise exposure is a leading occupational disease with up to five percent of the population at risk worldwide. It is particularly common in the military and in industrial settings (construction workers, mining, forestry and airline industry). At the present time, the only treatment strategies for hearing loss are hearing aids and cochlear implants. Drug therapies for noise-induced hearing loss have only recently been proposed and, to date, there are virtually no treatments that can repair the damage to the inner ear and reduce the impact of hearing loss.

Vlajkovic and his team's study investigates the potential of adenosine amine congener (ADAC) — a selective A1 adenosine receptor agonist — in the treatment of noise-induced hearing loss. Wistar rats were exposed to narrow-band noise for 2 — 24 hours in an acoustic chamber to induce cochlear damage and permanent hearing loss. ADAC or placebo control was then administered by injection(s) in the abdomen, either as a single injection at six hours or multiple daily injections. The researchers measured the hearing in the rats before and after the treatments using a technique known as auditory brainstem response (ABR). They also used histological techniques to determine the number of missing cochlear sensory hair cells after noise exposure and the noise-induced production of free radicals.

Their results show that cochlear injury and hearing loss in rats exposed to narrow-band noise can be substantially restored by ADAC administration after noise exposure. Early treatment starting six hours after noise exposure was the most effective and provided greater recovery than late treatment starting 24 hours after noise exposure. The most sustainable treatment strategy was the one involving multiple injections of ADAC for five days after noise exposure. This therapy significantly attenuated noise-induced hearing loss and improved sensory hair cell survival.

The authors conclude: "This study underpins an important role of adenosine signaling in mitigation of cochlear injury caused by oxidative stress. ADAC in particular emerges as an attractive pharmacological agent for therapeutic interventions in noise-induced cochlear injury in instances of both acute and extended noise exposures."


Journal Reference:

  1. Srdjan M. Vlajkovic, Kyu-Hyun Lee, Ann Chi Yan Wong, Cindy X. Guo, Rita Gupta, Gary D. Housley, Peter R. Thorne. Adenosine amine congener mitigates noise-induced cochlear injury. Purinergic Signalling, 2010; DOI: 10.1007/s11302-010-9188-5

Key mechanism in brain's computation of sound location identified

New York University researchers have identified a mechanism the brain uses to help process sound localization. Their findings, which appear in the latest edition of the journal PLoS Biology, focus on how the brain computes the different arrival times of sound into each ear to estimate the location of its source.

Animals can locate the source of a sound by detecting microsecond (one millionth of a second) differences in arrival time at their two ears. The neurons encoding these differences — called interaural time differences (ITDs) — receive a message from each ear. After receiving these messages, or synaptic inputs, they perform a microsecond computation to determine the location of the sound source. The NYU scientists found that one reason these neurons are able to perform such a rapid and sensitive computation is because they are extremely responsive to the input's "rise time" — the time it takes to reach the peak of the synaptic input.

Existing theories have held that the biophysical properties of the two inputs are identical — that is, messages coming from each ear are rapidly processed at the same time and in the same manner by neurons.

The NYU researchers challenged this theory by focusing on the nature of the neurons and the inputs — specifically, how sensitive they are in detecting differences in inputs' rise times and also how different are these rise times between the messages arriving from each ear.

Buoyed by predictions from computer modeling work, the researchers examined this process in gerbils, which are good candidates for study because they process sounds in a similar frequency range and with apparently similar neuro-architecture as humans.

Their initial experimental findings were obtained through examination of the gerbils' neuronal activity in charge of this task. This part of the brain was studied by stimulating directly the synaptic pathways. The researchers found that the rise times of the synaptic inputs coming from the two ears occur at different speeds: the rise time of messages coming from the ipsilateral ear are faster than those driven by the contralateral ear. (The brain has two groups of neurons that compute this task, one group in each brain hemisphere — ipsilateral messages come from the same-side ear and the contralateral messages come from opposite-side ear.) In addition, they found that the arrival time of the messages coming from each ear were different. This finding was not surprising as the distance from these neurons to the each ear is not symmetric. Other researchers had assumed that such asymmetry existed, but it was never measured and reported prior to this study. Given this newfound complexity of the way sound reaches the neurons in the brain, the researchers concluded that neurons did not have the capacity to process it in the way previously theorized.

Key insights about how these neurons actually function in processing sound coming from both ears were obtained by using the computer model. Their results identified that neurons perform the computation differently than what neuroscientists had proposed previously. These neurons not only encode the coincidence in arrival time of the two messages from each ear, but they also detect details on the input's shape more directly related to the time scale of the computation itself than other features proposed in previous studies.

"Some neurons in the brain respond to the net amplitude and width of summed inputs — they are integrators," explained Pablo Jercog and John Rinzel, two of the study's co-authors. "However, these auditory neurons respond to the rise time of the summed input and care less about the width. In other words, they are differentiators — key players on the brain's calculus team for localizing a sound source."

Jercog is a former graduate student at NYU's Department of Physics and Center for Neural Science and now a post-doctoral fellow at Columbia University; Rinzel is a professor in the Center for Neural Science and the Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences.

The study's other authors were: Dan Sanes, a professor in NYU's Department of Biology and Center for Neural Science; Gytis Svirskis, a former researcher at the Center for Neural Science; and Vibhakar Kotak, a research associate professor at the Center for Neural Science.


Journal Reference:

  1. Jercog PE, Svirskis G, Kotak VC, Sanes DH, Rinzel J. Asymmetric Excitatory Synaptic Dynamics Underlie Interaural Time Difference Processing in the Auditory System. PLoS Biology, 2010; 8 (6): e1000406 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1000406

Imaging reveals how brain fails to tune out phantom sounds of tinnitus

About 40 million people in the U.S. today suffer from tinnitus, an irritating and sometimes debilitating auditory disorder in which a person "hears" sounds, such as ringing, that don't actually exist. There isn't a cure for what has long been a mysterious ailment, but new research suggests there may, someday, be a way to alleviate the sensation of this sound, says a neuroscientist from Georgetown University Medical Center (GUMC).

In a Perspective piece in the June 24 issue of Neuron, Josef P. Rauschecker, PhD, says that tinnitus should be thought of as a disorder akin to the "phantom pain" felt in an amputated limb.

Tinnitus starts with damage to hair cells in the cochlea of the inner ear. This damage forces neurons in the brain's auditory areas, which normally receive input from that part of the cochlea, to become overactive to fill in the missing sound, he says. That extra, unreal noise is normally inhibited — or tuned out — by a corrective feedback loop from the brain's limbic system to the thalamus, where all sensory information is regulated, before it reaches the cerebral cortex, where a person becomes conscious of the senses. But that doesn't happen in tinnitus patients due to compromised brain structures in the limbic system.

"Neurons, trying to compensate for loss of an external signal, fire to produce sound that doesn't exist in tinnitus patients, just like neurons send pain signals to someone who has lost a limb," Rauschecker says. "What both people have in common is that they have lost the feedback loops that stop these signals from reaching consciousness."

Rauschecker says this conclusion, from his research and from other leaders in the field, provides the first testable model of human tinnitus that could provide some new avenues for therapy. "If we can find a way to turn that feedback system back on to eliminate phantom sound, it might be possible one day to take a pill and make tinnitus go away," he says.

Given his innovative work in tinnitus, Rauschecker was invited to write the review, and he collaborated with co-authors Amber Leaver, PhD., a researcher in his laboratory, and Mark Mühlau, a neurologist from the Technische Universität in Munich, Germany.

Tinnitus can be caused by damage to hair cells from a loud noise or from neurotoxicity from medications, he says, but more often than not, it is associated with hearing loss in some frequencies that commonly occurs as people grow older. And given that the world is becoming noisier and the population is aging in the U.S., incidence of tinnitus, which is already the most common auditory disorder in humans, is expected to increase even more, researchers say.

Adding to that increase are the rapidly mounting cases of tinnitus in soldiers due to loud explosions, Rauschecker says. "According to the Veterans Administration, tinnitus and post-traumatic stress disorder are the leading medical complaints," he says.

Research into tinnitus has become much more sophisticated of late, and is changing the common understanding of the disorder, Rauschecker says. "It has long been thought, and still is believed by many today, that tinnitus is a problem only of damaged hair cells in the inner ear, and if those hair cells are restored, tinnitus goes away."

The latest research suggests that while tinnitus may initially arise from such peripheral damage, it becomes a problem in the brain's central auditory pathways, which reorganizes itself in response to that damage, he says.

Recent animal models have corroborated this explanation he says, but have not provided a conclusive answer to the location and nature of these central changes. That has led neuroscientists to employ a whole-brain imaging approach, utilizing neurophysiological and functional imaging studies, to visualize various regions of hyperactivity in the auditory pathways of tinnitus patients.

The model that Rauschecker and his co-authors now propose, is that receptors in the auditory region of the brain that do not any longer perceive sensory input from damaged hair cells compensate by firing spontaneously and frequently, producing the initial tinnitus signals.

"Like phantom pain, the firing of central neurons in the brain continues to convey perceptual experiences, even though the corresponding sensory receptor cells have been destroyed," he says. "The brain fills in sensations in response to a deficit of input. Neighboring frequencies become amplified and expand into the vacated frequency range. It also happens to people with a hole in their retina. They don't see the hole because the brain fills in what is missing."

Imaging studies further show hyperactivity not only in auditory pathways of the cortex and thalamus but also in the non-auditory, limbic brain structures that regulate a number of functions including emotion. This limbic activation has been interpreted to reflect the emotional reaction of tinnitus patients to phantom sound, but research has now shown the limbic region normally blocks sound sensations sent from the auditory region that are not real. It does this by feeding sensations of sound that are not real back to a brain area in the thalamus (the thalamic reticular nucleus) that exerts inhibition on the sensory signals and can thus subtract the errant noise.

"This circuit serves as an active noise-cancelation mechanism — a feedback loop that subtracts sounds that should not be there," says Rauschecker. "But in cases where the limbic regions become dysfunctional, this noise-cancelation breaks down and the tinnitus signal permeates to the auditory cortex, where it enters consciousness."

Researchers have also found evidence that this inhibiting gating mechanism can be switched on and off, which explains why some tinnitus patients have a ringing sensation intermittently.

It remains unclear, however, why some individuals who have hearing loss do not develop tinnitus. Given that some people with tinnitus seem to be more susceptible to other disorders like chronic pain and depression, it could be that they have an independent, systemic vulnerability in one or more neurotransmitter systems in the limbic region," Rauschecker says. "That could explain why drugs that modulate neurotransmitters like serotonin appear to help some people out."

Insomnia is also linked to tinnitus, and not because ringing in the ears keeps patients awake, Rauschecker says. "Insomnia may cause tinnitus, and both may be related to serotonin depletion," he says. "It appears tinnitus is the auditory symptom of an underlying syndrome, which becomes evident in patients who happen to have a hearing loss," he says.

Therefore, identification of the transmitter systems involved in the brain's intrinsic noise cancellation system could open avenues for drug treatment of tinnitus, the authors say.

Grant support was provided by the National Institutes of Health, the Tinnitus Research Consortium, the Tinnitus Research Initiative, and the Skirball Foundation.


Journal Reference:

  1. Josef P. Rauschecker, Amber M. Leaver, Mark Mühlau. Tuning Out the Noise: Limbic-Auditory Interactions in Tinnitus. Neuron, 2010; 66 (6): 819-826 DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2010.04.032

Ear tubes appear safe for children with cochlear implants

 A history of ear tubes to treat infections does not appear to adversely affect children with cochlear implants, regardless of whether the tubes are left in place or removed before implantation, according to a report in the June issue of Archives of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, one of the JAMA/Archives journals.

Newborn hearing screening is now widespread and cochlear implants to reverse hearing loss have been shown to be successful in children younger than age 2, according to background information in the article. As a result, children are increasingly identified as candidates for cochlear implants near the peak age for developing acute otitis media, or middle ear infection. Myringotomy tubes, placed in the middle ear after a small incision is made in the eardrum, have been a mainstay of treatment of otitis media for children with normal hearing. However, they are avoided by some surgeons for children who have or are candidates for cochlear implants because of concerns about increased complications.

Christopher F. Barañano, M.D., and colleagues at the University of Alabama at Birmingham Medical School studied 78 ears of 62 children (average age 3.2) who received ear tubes before cochlear implants. In 46 (59 percent) of the cases, the tubes were removed before cochlear implantation surgery, whereas in 32 cases (41 percent), the tubes were kept in place until cochlear implantation.

Forty ears (51 percent) received more than one set of tubes; 10 ears (22 percent) in which the tubes were removed before cochlear implant surgery required additional tubes later, compared with six ears (19 percent) in which the tubes remained in place. All eardrums in which the tubes were removed before or during cochlear implantation healed. Three persistent eardrum perforations required surgical treatment. However, there were no cases of meningitis or removal of cochlear implants because of infection.

"The minimization of potential infectious complications is a priority for the cochlear implant surgeon who is operating on a child with a history of myringotomy tube placement," the authors write. "While manipulation of the tympanic membrane [eardrum] with myringotomy tube insertion, myringotomy tube exchange or perforation repair is not without risks, in the current study the management of the myringotomy tube before cochlear implantation did not adversely affect outcomes."

Cases of otorrhea — discharge from the ear — and eardrum perforation were successfully managed with standard surgical and medical therapies and typically did not require more extensive procedures. "Specific myringotomy tube management over the course of cochlear implantation does not appear to adversely affect the final outcomes in cases involving pediatric ears."


Journal Reference:

  1. Christopher F. Baranano; Richard S. Sweitzer; Mandy Lutz Mahalak; Nathan S. Alexander; Audie L. Woolley. The Management of Myringotomy Tubes in Pediatric Cochlear Implant Recipients. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 2010; 136 (6): 557-560 

How does the human brain memorize a sound?

Sound repetition allows us to memorize complex sounds in a very quick, effective and durable way. This form of auditory learning, which was evidenced for the first time by researchers from CNRS, ENS Paris, and Paris Descartes and Toulouse 3 universities, is believed to occur in daily life to help us identify and memorize sound patterns; it allows, for example, immediate recognition of sounds which become familiar through experience, such as the voice of relatives. The same mechanism is involved in the relearning of certain sounds, in particular when using hearing aids.

This study, which has just been published in the journal Neuron, opens new perspectives for understanding the process of auditory memory.

"Until now, the only available data on acoustic memorization concerned simple sounds or language"," points out Daniel Pressnitzer, CNRS researcher at the Laboratoire psychologie de la perception (CNRS/Université Paris Descartes/ENS Paris). Three French researchers set themselves the challenge of addressing complex sounds and studying our ability to memorize them, as little was known on the subject.

In order to investigate how auditory memory is formed, the researchers subjected volunteers to various noise samples: these noises were generated in a totally random and unpredictable way to ensure that the volunteers would never have heard them before. Furthermore, these original complex sound waves had no meaning, and were perceived at first as an indistinct hiss. Listeners were not told that an identical complex noise pattern could be played several times during the experiment.

Using this fairly simple protocol, the scientists discovered that our ear is remarkably effective in detecting noise repetitions. Listeners nearly always recognized the noise pattern that had been played several times; two listenings were enough for those with a trained ear, and only about ten for less experienced ears. Sound repetition therefore induces both extremely rapid and effective learning, which occurs implicitly (it is not supervised). In addition, this memory for noise can last several weeks. A fortnight after the first experiment, volunteers identified the noise pattern again, at first attempt.

The scientists have demonstrated the existence of a form of fast, solid and long-lasting auditory learning. Their experimental protocol has proven to be a relevant and simple method that could make it possible to study auditory memory in both humans and animals. These results imply that a mechanism for rapid auditory plasticity — that is, a mechanism involved in an auditory neuron's ability to adapt its response to a given sound stimulant — plays a very effective role in the learning of sounds.

This process is likely to be essential to identify and memorize recurrent sound patterns in our acoustic environment, such as the voice of relatives. It has all the characteristics considered necessary for human beings to learn to associate a sound with what produces it. The same mechanism may also be involved in relearning, which is often inevitable when hearing suddenly changes. This is true of hearing-impaired people who start using hearing aids. A period of adaptation to their prosthesis is necessary so they can get used to hearing sounds they no longer heard or perceived differently. The researchers hope that one day they will be able to study the effect of the modifications introduced by hearing aids on re-learning more in depth.


Journal Reference:

  1. Trevor R. Agus, Simon J. Thorpe, Daniel Pressnitzer. Rapid Formation of Robust Auditory Memories: Insights from Noise. Neuron, 2010; 66 (4): 610 DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2010.04.014