[Electrocochleographic analysis of the suppression of XXXX by electrical promontory stimulation and changes in compound action potentials].

@entity1 @entity8425 @entity392 @entity2167
We performed @entity8425 ( @entity8425 ) for the suppression of @entity392 in 52 @entity1 and measured Compound Action Potentials (CAP) using electrocochleography before and after @entity8425 . We examined the relation between residual inhibition and CAP. The purpose of this study was to investigate the origin and mechanism of suppression of @entity392 . Tinnitus was suppressed in 27 @entity1 (52%) after @entity8425 . In the group of @entity1 in which we suppressed @entity392 increased from 3.0 +/- 1.5 microV to 3.2 +/- 1.6 microV (p < 0.05), the loudness of @entity392 was reduced from 7.3 +/- 4.7 dBSL to 5.6 +/- 5.1 dBSL (p < 0.05) and the CAP latencies did not exhibit remarkable change. In the group of @entity1 in which we did not suppress @entity392 , latencies and the loudness of @entity392 did not change remarkably. These data indicate that @entity8425 affects auditory nerve fibers directly. It was reported that @entity8425 is effective for @entity392 of peripheral origin and not for that of central origin and, that in @entity392 of peripheral origin, the spontaneous discharges of the auditory nerve increase in number. It is hypothesized that @entity8425 affects @entity2167 by synchronizing these spontaneous discharges. Side effects of @entity8425 were cough and discomfort of the throat, nose, lips and oral cavity. These effects were observed only during electrical stimulation and there were no permanent side effects. In conclusion, @entity8425 affects auditory nerve fibers directly, is effective for @entity392 of peripheral origin and is not associated with serious complications.
