Advertisement

Low Doses of Aminoglycosides Alter the Action Potential Tuning Curve Without Change in Threshold Sensitivity

  • Jean-Luc Puel
  • Marc Lenoir
  • Alain Uziel
  • Rémy Pujol
Part of the Nato ASI Series book series (NSSA, volume 119)

Abstract

Compound auditory nerve action potentials (CAP) have been extensively used in the evaluation of drug ototoxicity. Electrophysiological changes observed after aminoglycoside treatment consist of a threshold elevation, an increase in CAP latency near threshold, and a modification of the amplitude of the CAP response as a function of the stimulus intensity (amplitude-intensity function) (see Aran, 1981). The action potential timing curves (APTC) measured with either a forward or a simultaneous masking paradigm also reveal a deterioration in cochlear frequency selectivity in aminoglycoside-treated animals (Harrison and Aran, 1981). However, these alterations have only been observed with high doses of antibiotics and very few reports have been concerned with the early detection of CAP changes following low-dose aminoglycoside treatment. The purpose of the present paper was to investigate in the rat the dose-dependent changes following administration of a range of amikacin doses, with emphasis on the effects of a weak intoxication.

Keywords

Hair Cell Outer Hair Cell Tuning Curve Frequency Selectivity Threshold Elevation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aran, J.-M. and Darrouzet, J. (1975). Observation of click-evoked compound VIIIth nerve responses before, during and over seven months after kanamycin treatment in the guinea pig, Acta Otolaryngol., 79, 24–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aran, J.-M, and Cazals, Y. (1978). Electrococleography: animals studies, in: Evoked Electrical Activity in the Auditory Nervous System, pp. 239–257, R.F. Naunton and C. Fernandez, eds., Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  3. Aran, J.-M. and Erre, J.-P. (1979). Long-term recording of cochleo-neural potentials in the guinea pig, in: Auditory Investigations, the Scientific and Technological Basis, pp. 233–261, H.A. Beagley, ed., Oxford Medical Engineering Series, Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  4. Aran, J.-M. (1981). Electrophysiology of cochlear toxicity, in: Aminoglycoside Ototoxicity, S.A. Lerner, G.J. Matz and J.E. Hawkins, eds., pp. 31–47, Little, Brown & Co., Boston.Google Scholar
  5. Brown, M.C., Nuttall, A.L. and Masta, R.I. (1983). Intracellular recordings from cochlear inner hair cells: effects of stimulation of the crossed olivocochlear efferents, Science, 222, 69–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carlier, E. and Pujol, R. (1982). Sectioning of the efferent bundle decreases cochlear frequency selectivity, Neurosci. Letters, 28, 101–106.Google Scholar
  7. Comis, S.D., Leng, G. and Pratt, S.R. (1981). The effects of fursemide, bumetanide and piretanide on the guinea pig cochlea and auditory nerve, Scand. Audiol., Suppl. 14, 85–95.Google Scholar
  8. Dallos, P. and Cheatham, M.A. (1976). Compound action potential ( AP) tuning curves, J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 62, 1048–1051.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Harrison, R.V., Aran, J.-M, and Erre, J.-P. (1981). AP tuning curves from normal and pathological human and guinea pig cochleas, J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 69, 1374–1385.Google Scholar
  10. Harrison, R.V. and Aran, J.-M. (1982). Electrocochleographic measures of frequency selectivity in human deafness, Brit. J. Audiol., 16, 179–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kiang, N.Y.S., Moxon, E.C. and Levine, R.A. (1970). Auditory-nerve activity in cats with normal and abnormal cochleas, in: Sensorineural Hearing Loss: CIBA Foundation Symposium, pp. 241–268, Wolstenholme and J. Knight, eds., Churchill, London.Google Scholar
  12. Pickles, J.0. (1985). Recent advances in cochlear physiology. Progressxin Neurobiol., 24, 1–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Puel, J.-L., Lenoir, M. and Uziel, A. (1986). Dose-dependent changes in the rat cochlea following aminoglycoside intoxication. I. Physiological study. Accepted for publication in Hearing Res.Google Scholar
  14. Liberman, M.C. and Dodds, L.W. (1984). Single-neuron labeling and chronic cochlear pathology. III. Stereocilia damage and alterations of threshold tuning curves, Hearing Res., 16, 55–74.Google Scholar
  15. Robertson, D., Cody, A.R., Bredberg, G. and Johnstone, Response properties of spiral ganglion neurons in cochleas damaged by direct mechanical trauma. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 67, 1295–1303.Google Scholar
  16. Evans, E.F. and Harrison, R.V. (1976). Correlation between outer hair cell damage and deterioration in cochlear nerve tuning properties in the guinea pig, J. Physiol., 256, 43–44.Google Scholar
  17. Furness, D.N. and Hackney, C.M. (1986). Are inner hair cells untrastruct-urally normal in regions of outer hair cell loss following kanamycin treatment? 23rd. Workshop on Inner Ear Biology, Berlin.Google Scholar
  18. Pick, G.F. and Evans, E.F. (1983) Dissociation between frequency resolution and hearing threshold, in: Hearing - Physiological Bases and Psychophysics, R. Klinke and R. Hartmann, eds., Springer, Berlin.Google Scholar
  19. Pick, G.F. (1980), Comment on paper by Ritsma, et al., in Psychophysical Physiological and Behavioural Studies in Hearing, G. van den Brink and F.A. Bilsen, eds., Delft University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jean-Luc Puel
    • 1
  • Marc Lenoir
    • 1
  • Alain Uziel
    • 1
  • Rémy Pujol
    • 1
  1. 1.INSERM-U. 254, Lab. Neurobiologie de l’AuditionCHR Hôspital St. CharlesMontpellier CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations