Electrocochleography (ECochG) is a technique for recording evoked potentials from
the inner ear, generally believed to originate from hair cells and nerve fibers. It
is useful for assessing inner ear function in both laboratory and clinical settings.
The abbreviation ECochG is preferable to ECoG, because the latter can be confused
with “electrocorticogram” (Ferraro, 1986). ECochG measurements are typically made
from the ear canal or eardrum (extratympanic), from the promontory or round window
niche (transtympanic), or from inside the cochlea (intracochlear). Extratympanic ECochG
recordings are most commonly made with “tiptrodes” (gold foil wrapped around insert
earphones) or “tymptrodes” (electrodes placed directly on the tympanic membrane).
While the amplitude of tymptrode measurements can be up to an order of magnitude larger
than tiptrode measurements (Ferraro and Ferguson, 1989), transtympanic amplitudes
can be far more than an order of magnitude larger than those on the eardrum (e.g.,
Ruth et al., 1988). We thus suggest that extratympanic measurements are best classified
as far-field, and transtympanic measurements as near-field.
We will give a brief overview of ECochG before reviewing its traditional uses, and
surveying recent advances that promise new applications in the assessment of auditory
and vestibular function. References to the 23 papers collected for this Research Topic
have been hyperlinked to Frontiers webpages. A more extensive historical overview
of ECochG, including its basic features and applications, was provided by Eggermont.
A complementary review by Gibson offers tips for optimizing ECochG recordings in different
clinical situations. Electrovestibulography (EVestG) is an analogous emerging technique
for characterizing vestibular hair cell and nerve function, and was reviewed by Brown
et al.
Sensory cells of the inner ear can be manipulated, damaged, or destroyed in varying
degrees depending on the ototoxic agent, administration approach, and dose, giving
rise to hearing deficits at specific sound frequencies and intensities, as well as
vestibular problems. A major long-term goal of ECochG is to help differentiate outer
hair cell (OHC) from inner hair cell (IHC) or presynaptic losses, and from auditory
nerve fiber (ANF) or postsynaptic losses, which are all presently lumped together
as sensorineural hearing loss. Differential diagnosis of different forms of sensorineural
hearing loss could prove useful in improving hearing aid fitting, in predicting cochlear
implantation outcomes, and in individualized regenerative medicine (McLean et al.,
2016, 2017).
ECochG measurements are believed to originate, in general, from at least four distinct
cellular sources, the receptor potentials of OHCs and IHCs, and the dendritic potentials
and spikes of ANFs. The phases or polarities of these components can vary along the
cochlea in a complex fashion that depends on stimulus characteristics and electrode
placement, confounding their separation and interpretation (Chertoff et al., 2012).
For example, the origins of the commonly measured summating potential (SP) and cochlear
microphonic (CM) are still unknown for the wide range of stimulus parameters and recording
locations. The older term “cochlear response”, which seems to have become passé, thus
remains an adequate descriptor of ECochG recordings as long as their origins remain
elusive. A newer term with the same purpose appears to be the “total response” (e.g.,
McClellan et al., 2014). Continuing the progress toward untangling the different origins
of ECochG measurements is essential to advance the clinical utility of ECochG (e.g.,
Forgues et al., 2014; Lichtenhan et al., 2014; Fontenot et al.).
The first ECochG measurements were obtained somewhat serendipitously by Wever and
Bray (1930), who were attempting to record from cat ANFs. Their alternating or AC
potential would come to be known as the cochlear microphonic (CM) and its origin was
attributed to the hair cells, primarily to the more numerous and sensitive OHCs (Dallos
and Cheatham, 1976), which amplify and sharpen sound-induced vibrations before their
detection by the sensory IHCs and ANFs. It was later discovered that ANF spiking could
also contribute to CM measurements, particularly in response to lower-frequency sounds
(<1–2 kHz), and that IHCs contributed as well (Eggermont, 1974; Chertoff et al., 2002;
Lichtenhan et al., 2014). This blend of responses became known as the auditory nerve
neurophonic (ANN, e.g., Snyder and Schreiner, 1984; Forgues et al., 2014), which is
simply a cochlear response to intense, low-frequency sounds. The Auditory Nerve Overlapped
Waveform (ANOW; Lichtenhan et al., 2013, 2014) differs from the ANN in that it is
evoked by low to moderate level sounds, and its cellular and spatial origins are known.
ECochG measurements can be DC-biased by the summating potential (SP), and show compound
action potential (CAP) responses to stimulus onsets and sometimes offsets, reflecting
the synchronous spiking of ANFs (Davis et al., 1958; Ruben et al., 1961). The CAP
is wave I of the auditory brainstem response (ABR), first characterized by Jewett
and Williston (1971).
A long-standing use of ECochG has been to objectively corroborate a symptomatic and
case-history diagnosis of endolymphatic hydrops in Meniere's disease and other pathological
states (endolymphatic hydrops is not limited to Meniere's). In ears with endolymphatic
hydrops, the SP/CAP ratio can be increased, due mainly to an increase in the SP, but
also to a decrease in the CAP. Despite much research, it is not known whether the
sensitivity and specificity of ECochG for detecting endolymphatic hydrops is high
enough to be useful for individual patients. Sass (1998) reported high sensitivity
and specificity (87 and 100%, respectively) when transtympanic click and 1 kHz tone
burst SP/CAP ratios were combined with the increased CAP latency difference between
rarefaction and condensation stimulus clicks that is also typical of ears with endolymphatic
hydrops. Others have also reported good sensitivity and specificity by using the SP/CAP
area (e.g., Ferraro, 2010). As reviewed by Eggermont and Hornibrook, the results of
some other studies have been less encouraging, but there is consensus that tone burst
ECochG presently yields the best results (Hornibrook). In a promising new approach,
Lichtenhan et al.induced endolymphatic hydrops in guinea pigs using three classical
manipulations and found that changes in the ANOW were more sensitive to small degrees
of endolymphatic hydrops than were changes in traditional measures such as CAP thresholds
and the endocochlear potential, suggesting that the ANOW could be useful in the early
detection of endolymphatic hydrops.
ECochG can be used in the diagnosis of auditory neuropathy (Widen et al., 1995; Rance
and Starr, 2015), an umbrella term that includes many etiologies such as drug- or
hypoxia-induced IHC loss (Harrison, 1998; Salvi et al.), noise- and age-related synaptopathy
(Kujawa and Liberman, 2015), hereditary synaptopathy and neuropathy (e.g., mutations
of OTOF, OPA1, and other genes; Santarelli et al., 2013), and even acoustic neuroma.
While MRI can be useful in confirming some cases of auditory neuropathy (e.g., Roche
et al., 2010), it is typically diagnosed when an absent or abnormal CAP or ABR, even
at high stimulus levels, co-occurs with a robust CM and/or otoacoustic emissions (OAEs).
Speech perception deficits, both in quiet and in noise, are worse than expected from
the audiometric loss. Identifying ears with auditory neuropathy is important for predicting
cochlear implant outcomes, which are generally poorer compared to non-neuropathic
patients (McMahon et al., 2008; Walton et al., 2008; Harrison et al., 2015; Santarelli
et al., 2015).
Salvi et al.provided an instructive review of selective IHC loss in chinchillas due
to the cancer drug carboplatin. Substantial IHC loss had no measurable effect on OAEs
or the CM (however, see Chertoff et al., 2002), but reduced SP and CAP amplitudes.
Tone thresholds in quiet were unaffected by IHC losses of up to 80%, but thresholds
in noise were elevated (Lobarinas et al., 2016). Importantly, the chinchilla carboplatin
studies reviewed by Salvi et al. were also among the first to provide compelling evidence
for synaptic gain increases in the central auditory system in response to decreased
peripheral input. While increased central gain can lead to improved audibility in
quiet conditions (see e.g.,Hoben et al.), it might also lead to potentially bothersome
tinnitus and hyperacusis (Noreña, 2011; Schaette and McAlpine, 2011; Pienkowski et
al., 2014; Brotherton et al., 2015; Paul et al., 2017).
ECochG is a promising candidate for detecting noise- and age-related cochlear synaptopathy
(Kujawa and Liberman, 2009, 2015; Sergeyenko et al., 2013). It was recently reported
that college student musicians with normal audiometric thresholds up to 8 kHz, but
mild hearing losses at 10–16 kHz, showed significantly increased click-evoked SP amplitudes
and slightly decreased CAP amplitudes (Liberman et al., 2016), changes reminiscent
of endolymphatic hydrops but in this case attributed to noise-induced synaptopathy.
Bramhall et al. (2017) found reduced CAP amplitudes in military veterans with high
noise exposure histories, and in non-veterans who reported a history of firearm use,
compared with veterans and non-veterans with lower noise histories. Importantly, the
reduced CAP amplitudes could not be explained by OHC dysfunction, as assessed with
distortion product OAEs (DPOAEs). Other studies using CAP or ABR wave I amplitudes
(as well as other metrics) have failed to detect evidence of synaptopathy in noise-exposed
adults (e.g., Prendergast et al., 2017). However, it may be that people who regularly
subject themselves to high recreational noise doses do so because of their “tougher”
ears, which sustain less damage than the potentially more “tender” ears of people
who avoid loud music and noise (see e.g., Henderson et al., 1993 for a general discussion
of this issue).
Grinn et al. reported CAP and DPOAE amplitudes, and Words-in-Noise (WIN) performance
in a group of young adults before, and 1 and 7 days after a loud recreational event,
typically a concert (average dose of 93 dB A for 4 h, range 73–104 dB A for 1.5–16
h). Consistent with the notion of tough vs. tender ears, there was no correlation
between the noise dose and the amount of temporary threshold shift (TTS) measured
across study participants. Most showed a 1 day TTS of <10 dB (with full recovery at
7 days), accompanied by correspondingly small but significant temporary decreases
in WIN scores. DPOAE amplitudes were affected at 1 day but only at 6 kHz, whereas
CAP amplitudes to clicks and 2–4 kHz tone bursts were not affected. These results
argue against the development of synaptopathy after a single recreational noise dose,
consistent with laboratory noise exposure that caused a TTS in humans (Lichtenhan
and Chertoff, 2008). It is likely that a number of such exposures is needed to produce
permanent damage in primates (Pienkowski, 2017; Valero et al., 2017).
To reduce the prevalence of noise-induced hearing loss, tinnitus, and hyperacusis,
it would be helpful to identify those with especially tender ears. Maison and Liberman
(2000) showed that the strength of the medial olivocochlear (MOC) efferent reflex
in guinea pigs, as measured by the contralateral suppression of DPOAEs, was strongly
correlated with lower TTS after acoustic trauma. Unfortunately, this finding has yet
to be replicated in humans (e.g., Hannah et al., 2014). Smith et al.made measurements
of chirp-evoked human CAPs, confirming the original finding that chirps yield larger
CAP amplitudes than clicks (Chertoff et al., 2010). Smith et al. found that CAP amplitudes
were more strongly contralaterally suppressible than were DPOAE amplitudes, similar
to the results of previous animal and human studies (Puria et al., 1996; Lichtenhan
et al., 2016). Verschooten et al. made progress in studying the human MOC reflex triggered
by ipsilateral sound, by proposing how to separate MOC effects from the confounds
of mechanical and neural masking.
This Research Topic reports innovations in recording techniques and signal processing
that point to new potentially useful roles for ECochG in clinical practice (Charaziak
et al.; Cook et al.; Kennedy et al.). Other innovations have noteworthy applications
associated with cochlear implantation. Bester et al., Dalbert et al., Koka et al.,
and O'Connell et al., used ECochG to objectively assess residual, low-frequency acoustic
hearing in ears implanted with hybrid electric-acoustic stimulation devices. He et
al. comprehensively reviewed the electrically-evoked CAP or eCAP, including its applications
in establishing implant candidacy, in intraoperative monitoring for electrode guidance,
and in post-operative device programming and outcome assessment. Riggs et al. made
intraoperative measurements from child and adult implantees with and without diagnosed
auditory neuropathy, and found results consistent with better hair cell but poorer
neural function compared to non-neuropathic patients. While it remains a challenge
to accurately estimate ANF survival in implant candidates, Pardo-Jadue et al. suggest
that tymptrode measurements of spontaneous ANF firing (in the absence of sound or
other stimulation) could be helpful in this regard.
The telemetric innovations of modern cochlear implants have advanced research in intracochlear
ECochG. Kim et al. reported the first intracochlear ECochG measurements from cochlear
implant (Nucleus Hybrid L24) users. Koka and Litvak performed the first intracochlear
ECochG recordings in response to simultaneous electrical and acoustic stimulation
in patients implanted with Advanced Bionics HiRes 90K Advantage. The results of these
pioneering measurements may point the way forward to objectively programming hybrid
cochlear implants and better predicting speech outcomes.
The past informs the present, as the saying goes, and this is certainly true of the
field of ECochG. It is usual for even good data to be misinterpreted in the context
of the available theories of the day. Likewise, it is usual for previous interpretations
to become outdated as new advances are made. Nevertheless, interpretations, not data,
are typically the main intellectual drive of textbooks and review articles, and new
trainees to a field often begin with these sources. Once a knowledge base becomes
firmly entrenched, it can sometimes be difficult and uncomfortable to realize that
a framework is no longer adequate to encapsulate new findings, and needs updating.
We hope to have clarified some of the main ideas, terminology, and origins of ECochG
measurements, and encourage all to study the almost 90 year history of this field.
Author contributions
MP: drafted the manuscript; JL and MP: edited the manuscript; JL: organized the Research
Topic; JL, OA, and MP: shared editing responsibilities on the Research Topic.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial
or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.