正常青年人AEPs的频率特性及其反应阈与纯音听阈的比较  

Frequency Characteristics of AEPs in Normal Young Adults and Comparison of Their Response Threshold and Pure Tone Audiometry Threshold

作　　者：程龙龙 罗方亮 熊妍荷 贾富全 汤鹏[6] 刘微 张彪 刘技辉[1] 王海霞[2] CHENG Long-long;LUO Fang-liang;XIONG Yan-he;JIA Fu-quan;TANG Peng;LIU Wei;ZHANG Biao;LIU Ji-hui;WANG Hai-xia(School of Forensic Medicine,China Medical University,Shenyang 110122,China;Affiliated Zhongshan Hospital of Dalian University,Dalian 116001,Liaoning Province,China;Institute of Forensic Science,Liaoning University,Shenyang 110036,China;Institute of Forensic Expertise,Shanghai Punan Hospital of Pudong New District,Shanghai 200125,China;Department of Forensic Medicine,School of Basic Medical Sciences,Inner Mongolia Medical University,Hohhot 010059,China;The People’s Liberation Army Judicial Expertise Center,Beijing 100120,China;Hunan Xiangya Judical Identification Center,Changsha 410013,China;Criminal Detachment of Shenyang Public Security Bureau,Shenyang 110013,China)

机构地区：[1]中国医科大学法医学院,辽宁沈阳110122 [2]大连大学附属中山医院,辽宁大连116001 [3]辽宁大学司法鉴定中心,辽宁沈阳110036 [4]上海市浦东新区浦南医院司法鉴定所,上海200125 [5]内蒙古医科大学基础医学院法医学教研室,内蒙古呼和浩特010059 [6]中国人民解放军司法鉴定中心,北京100120 [7]湖南省湘雅司法鉴定中心,湖南长沙410013 [8]沈阳市公安局刑事警察支队,辽宁沈阳110013

出　　处：《法医学杂志》2020年第3期305-310,315,共7页Journal of Forensic Medicine

基　　金：辽宁省教育厅科学技术研究资助项目(2310015025)。

摘　　要：目的对正常青年人进行3种类型听觉诱发电位(auditory evoked potentials,AEPs)测试,了解不同测试方法的频率特性以及反应阈与纯音听阈之间的关系,探讨3种类型AEPs评定听觉功能的法医学价值。方法选择20名正常青年人,记录双耳0.5、1.0、2.0、4.0kHz下标准纯音听阈、短时程纯音听阈和3种类型AEPs(短纯音听觉脑干反应、40Hz听觉事件相关电位与颅顶慢反应)的反应阈,分析不同频率3种类型AEPs反应阈与标准纯音听阈、短时程纯音听阈之间的关系以及不同类型AEPs间的差异。结果各频率短时程纯音听阈均高于标准纯音听阈。3种类型AEPs反应阈与纯音听阈均具有相关性,各频率下3种类型AEPs反应阈均高于短时程纯音听阈和标准纯音听阈,且与标准纯音听阈的差值间差异具有统计学意义。建立了正常青年人3种类型AEPs反应阈(声压级)推断标准纯音听阈(听力级)的直线回归模型。结论运用不同类型AEPs反应阈推测纯音听阈时均需要换算和校正,运用不同类型AEPs的组合可提高听功能判断的准确性。Objective The tests of three types of auditory evoked potentials(AEPs)were performed on normal young adults,to understand the frequency characteristics of different testing methods and the relationship between response threshold and pure tone audiometry threshold of different methods,and to discuss the forensic value of 3 types of AEPs to evaluate hearing function.Methods Twenty normal young adults were selected,their standard pure tone audiometry threshold,short-term pure tone audiometry threshold and the response threshold of 3 types of AEPs(tone burst-auditory brainstem response,40 Hz auditory event-related potential and slow vertex response)at 0.5 kHz,1.0 kHz,2.0 kHz and 4.0 kHz were recorded.The relationship between the response threshold and standard pure tone audiometry threshold,short-term pure tone audiometry threshold of 3 types of AEPs at different frequencies as well as the differences between different types of AEPs were analyzed.Results The short-term pure tone audiometry threshold was higher than the standard pure tone audiometry threshold at each frequency.The response threshold and standard pure tone audiometry threshold of the 3 types of AEPs all had a certain correlation,and the response threshold of the 3 types of AEPs was higher than short-term pure tone audiometry threshold and standard pure tone audiometry threshold at each frequency.The differences in the differences between the response threshold and standard pure tone audiometry threshold of the 3 types of AEPs at different frequencies had statistical significance.Linear regression mathematical models were established to infer the standard pure tone audiometry threshold(hearing level)from response threshold(sound pressure level)of 3 types of AEPs of normal young adults.Conclusion When using response threshold of different types of AEPs to estimate pure tone audiometry threshold,conversion and correction are needed.Combined use of different types of AEPs could improve the accuracy of hearing function evaluation.

关 键 词：法医学 诱发电位 听觉 听阈 测听法 纯音 短纯音听觉脑干反应 40 Hz听觉事件相关电位 颅顶慢反应 

分 类 号：D919[医药卫生—法医学]