Pathogenesis of the Broad Waveform in Electrocochleograms

  • Taizo Takeda
  • Haruo Saito
  • Izumi Sawada
  • Masaaki Kitahara


The widened AP-SP complex is one of the characteristic features of electrocochleograms (ECochGs) in patients with Ménière’s disease. This broad waveform has also been noted in other cases of endolymphatic hydrops, such as hydrops without vertigo, luetic hydrops, etc [1]. Hence, the broadening in the waveform of ECochGs seems to be of great value for the objective differential diagnosis of endolymphatic hydrops. However, a similar waveform is often observed in cases of retrocochlear lesions, such as cerebellopontine (CP) angle tumors and kernicterus [2, 3]. Since endolymphatic hydrops is not thought to be involved in these diseases, the diagnostic value of ECochG is thereby limited.


Hair Cell Outer Hair Cell Benign Paroxysmal Positional Vertigo Vestibular Nerve Endolymphatic Hydrops 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Kitahara M, Takeda T, Yazawa Y, Matsubara H (1981) Electrocochleography in the diagnosis of Ménière’s disease. In: Vosteen K-H, Schuknecht H, Pfaltz CR, Wersäll J, Kimura RS, Morgenstern K, Juhn SK (eds) Ménière’s disease: Pathogenesis, diagnosis and treatment. Georg Thieme, New York, pp 163–169Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Portmann M, Aran JM (1972) Relations entre «Pattern» electrocochleographique et pathologie retro-labyrinthique. Acta Otolaryngol (Stockh) 73: 190–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Eggermont J, Don M, Brackman D (1980) Electrocochleography and auditory brain-stem electric responses in patients with pontine angle tumors. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol [Suppl] 75: 1–19Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Eggermont J (1976) Electrocochleography. In: Keidel W, Neff W (eds) Clinical and special topics. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 626–705 (Handbook of sensory physiology, vol 5/3)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Takeuchi S, Takeda T, Saito H (1990) Pressure relationship between perilymph and endolymph in guinea pigs. Acta Otolaryngol (Stockh) 109: 93–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Takeuchi S, Takeda T, Saito H (1989) Pressure difference between endolymph and perilymph in a guinea pig model of endolymphatic hydrops (in Japanese). Equilibrium Res [Suppl] 5: 88–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dohlmann GF (1980) Mechanism of Ménière’s attack. ORL 42: 10–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Whitefield IC, Ross HF (1965) Cochlear-microphonic and summating potentials and outputs of individual haircell generations. J Acoust Soc Am 38: 126–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Engebretson AM, Eldredge DH (1968) Model for the nonlinear characteristics of cochlear potentials. J Acoust Soc Am 44: 548–554PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kim DO (1986) Active and nonlinear cochlear biomechanics and the role of outer-hair- cell subsystem in the mammalian auditory system. Hear Res 22: 105–114PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zenner HP, Zimmermann U, Scmitt U (1985) Reversible contraction of isolated mammalian cochlear hair cell. Hear Res 18: 127–133PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Siegel JH, Kim DO (1982) Efferent neural control of cochlear mechanics? Olivocochlear bundle stimulation affects cochlear biomechanical nonlinearity. Hear Res 6: 171–182PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Tokyo 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Taizo Takeda
  • Haruo Saito
  • Izumi Sawada
  • Masaaki Kitahara

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations