Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35254541›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO2022

Neural Contributions to the Cochlear Summating Potential: Spiking and Dendritic Components.

Brendan T Lutz, Kendall A Hutson, Eleonora M C Trecca, Meredith Hamby, Douglas C Fitzpatrick

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Minimum Detectable Differences in Electrocochleography Measurements: Bayesian-Based Predictions.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Brendan T LutzThe University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Department of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery, 101 Mason Farm Rd, CB#7546, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Kendall A HutsonThe University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Department of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery, 101 Mason Farm Rd, CB#7546, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Eleonora M C TreccaIRCCS Casa Sollievo Della Sofferenza, Department of Maxillofacial Surgery and Otolaryngology, San Giovanni Rotondo (Foggia), Italy.
Meredith HambyThe University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Department of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery, 101 Mason Farm Rd, CB#7546, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Douglas C FitzpatrickThe University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Department of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery, 101 Mason Farm Rd, CB#7546, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. dcf@med.unc.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-8099-7194
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USUniversity of Foggia · IT

Funding

U.S. Department of Defense W81XWH-18-HRRP-FARA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Using electrocochleography, the summating potential (SP) is a deflection from baseline to tones and an early rise in the response to clicks. Here, we use normal hearing gerbils and gerbils with outer hair cells removed with a combination of furosemide and kanamycin to investigate cellular origins of the SP. Round window electrocochleography to tones and clicks was performed before and after application of tetrodotoxin to prevent action potentials, and then again after kainic acid to prevent generation of an EPSP. With appropriate subtractions of the response curves from the different conditions, the contributions to the SP from outer hair cells, inner hair cell, and neural "spiking" and "dendritic" responses were isolated. Like hair cells, the spiking and dendritic components had opposite polarities to tones - the dendritic component had negative polarity and the spiking component had positive polarity. The magnitude of the spiking component was larger than the dendritic across frequencies and intensities. The onset to tones and to clicks followed a similar sequence; the outer hair cells responded first, then inner hair cells, then the dendritic component, and then the compound action potential of the spiking response. These results show the sources of the SP include at least the four components studied, and that these have a mixture of polarities and magnitudes that vary across frequency and intensity. Thus, multiple possible interactions must be considered when interpreting the SP for clinical uses.

Indexed as

Cochlear Microphonic PotentialsCochlear NerveAction PotentialsAudiometry, Evoked ResponseHair Cells, Auditory, InnerHair Cells, Auditory, OuterAuditory evoked responseCochlear implantsCochlear synaptopathyElectrocochleographyEndolymphatic hydrops

Identifiers

PMID35254541
PMCPMC9085993
OpenAlexW4220807020

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.