Effects of contralateral noise on CAEP (Lee et al., 2025)

<p dir="ltr"><b>Purpose: </b>There is evidence from past animal work that the neural signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) is modulated through the action of the medial olivocochlear reflex (MOCR). This is commonly referred to as unmasking. However, evidence of unmasking in humans is limited, perhaps due to the traditional approach of measuring the MOCR using otoacoustic emissions—a preneural metric. The amplitudes and latencies of the late latency response (LLR) are sensitive to changes in SNR and may provide a means to noninvasively evaluate MOCR unmasking at the neural level. The purpose of this study was to investigate MOCR-mediated enhancement of ipsilateral noise in humans using the LLR.</p><p dir="ltr"><b>Method: </b>Fifty normal-hearing adults were recruited. The LLR was measured for a 60 dB SPL, 1-kHz tone in both ipsilateral quiet and ipsilateral noise, with and without presentation of contralateral noise. For the ipsilateral noise conditions, the noise was presented at three different levels to achieve SNRs of +5 dB, +15 dB, and +25 dB. The contralateral noise was always 60 dB SPL white noise. LLR latencies (P1, N1, and P2) and interpeak amplitudes (P1-N1 and N1-P2) were measured for all conditions. In addition, otoacoustic emissions (OAEs) for a 1-kHz tone burst were measured in ipsilateral quiet both with and without contralateral noise. The same contralateral noise was used for both OAEs and LLRs.</p><p dir="ltr"><b>Results: </b>For the ipsilateral noise conditions, SNR had a significant effect on LLR latencies and interpeak amplitudes: Latencies decreased, and amplitudes increased as SNR improved. The presentation of contralateral noise had a significant effect on P1 and N1 latencies, both of which decreased. LLR interpeak amplitudes significantly increased upon the presentation of contralateral noise. For the ipsilateral quiet condition, there were no significant effects of contralateral noise on LLR metrics. Though OAE magnitudes were significantly reduced upon presentation of contralateral noise, consistent significant relationships between OAE magnitude changes and changes in the LLR metrics were not found.</p><p dir="ltr"><b>Conclusion: </b>Findings suggest that the presentation of contralateral noise enhances the neural response to an ipsilateral noise, potentially through MOC efferent feedback.</p><p dir="ltr"><b>Supplemental Material S1.</b> Each panel shows the change in LLR latency (left panel: P1 latency, middle panel: N1 latency, right panel: P2 latency) compared to the change in OAE level upon presentation of contralateral noise.</p><p dir="ltr"><b>Supplemental Material S2.</b> Each panel shows the change in LLR inter-peak amplitude (left panel: P1-N1 inter-peak amplitude, right panel: N1-P2 inter-peak amplitude) compared to the change in OAE level upon presentation of contralateral noise.</p><p dir="ltr"><b>Supplemental Material S3.</b> Each panel shows the change in LLR latency (left column: P1 latency, middle column: N1 latency, right column: P2 latency) compared to the change in OAE level upon presentation of contralateral noise.</p><p dir="ltr"><b>Supplemental Material S4.</b> Each panel shows the change in LLR inter-peak amplitude (left column: P1-N1 inter-peak amplitude, right column: N1-P2 inter-peak amplitude) compared to the change in OAE level upon presentation of contralateral noise.</p><p dir="ltr">Lee, D., Lewis, J. D., Harkrider, A., & Hedrick, M. (2025). Effects of contralateral noise on cortical auditory evoked potential latencies and amplitudes<i>. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research,</i><i> </i><i>68</i>(8), 4123–4138. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1044/2025_JSLHR-24-00698" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1044/2025_JSLHR-24-00698</a></p>