Brainstem Auditory Evoked Potentials

Chapter

Abstract

The auditory brainstem evoked potential (ABEP) is probably the potential with the most names and acronyms in the field. The potential is also commonly known as the auditory brainstem response (ABR), the auditory evoked potential (AEP), the brainstem auditory evoked potential (BAEP), and the short-latency AEP [1]. However, despite its large number of names, it is one of the simpler potentials recorded in the operating room. Auditory stimulation results in a train of evoked potentials that extend for a prolonged period of time (up to 250 ms). However in the operating room, we are predominantly concerned with the short-latency, subcortical responses, often termed the short-latency auditory evoked potentials. Colleagues in audiology use the longer latency potentials in their assessment of hearing [2].

Keywords

Ischemia Attenuation Foam Rubber Drilling 

Selected References

  1. 1.
    Nuwer MR. Intraoperative monitoring of neural function. New York: Elsevier; 2008.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bess FH, Humes LE. Audiology: the fundamentals. 4th ed. Baltimore, MD: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2008.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cooper R, Binnie CD, Billings R. Techniques in clinical neurophysiology. New York: Elsevier; 2003.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hendelman WJ. Atlas of functional neuroanatomy. 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Taylor & Francis; 2006.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Netter FH. Atlas of human anatomy. 4th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders Elsevier; 2006.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rhoton AL. Cranial anatomy and surgical approaches. Neurosurgery. 2003;53:1–746. Apuzzo MLJ, editor. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Schaumburg.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Amano M, Kohno M, Nagata O, Taniguchi M, Sora S, Sato H. Intraoperative continuous monitoring of evoked facial nerve electromyograms in acoustic neuroma surgery. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2011;153(5):1059–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Legatt AD. Mechanisms of intraoperative brainstem auditory evoked potential changes. J Clin Neurophysiol. 2002;19(5):396–408.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nuwer MR, Daube J, Fischer C, Schramm J, Yingling CD. Neuromonitoring during surgery. Report of an IFCN Committee. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1993;87(5):263–76.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Squire, Berg, Bloom, de Lac, Ghosh, Spitzer. Principles of neuroscience. 3rd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1991.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Vidmer S, Sergio C, Veronica S, Flavia T, Silvia E, Sara B, et al. The neurophysiological balance in Chiari type I malformation (CM1), tethered cord and related syndromes. Neurol Sci. 2011;32 Suppl 3:S311–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Legatt AD, Arezzo JC, Vaughan HG. Short-latency auditory evoked potentials in the monkey. II. Intracranial generators. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1986;64(1):53–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Legatt AD, Arezzo JC, Vaughan HG. The anatomic and physiologic bases of brain stem auditory evoked potentials. Neurol Clin. 1988;6(4):681–704.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Legatt ADAJ, Vaughan HG. Short-latency auditory evoked potentials in the monkey. I Wave shape and surface topography. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1986;64(1):41–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Binnie CD, Cooper R, Mauguiere F, Osselton JW, Prior PF, Tedman BF. Clinical neurophysiology: EMG, nerve conduction, and evoked potentials. New York: Elsevier; 2004.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Smith NJ, van Gils M, Prior PF. Neurophysiological monitoring during intensive care and surgery. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier Mosby; 2006.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Webster JG. Medical instrumentation: application and design. 3rd ed. New York: Wiley; 1998.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SurgeryUniversity of SaskatchewanSaskatoonCanada

Personalised recommendations