The auditory startle response in parkinsonism may reveal the extent but not type of pathology

2008 ◽  
Vol 255 (5) ◽  
pp. 628-632 ◽  
Author(s):  
David R. Williams* ◽  
Louise M. F. Doyle* ◽  
Andrew J. Lees ◽  
P. Brown
2017 ◽  
Vol 49 (6) ◽  
pp. 407-413
Author(s):  
Meral E. Kızıltan ◽  
Leyla Köse Leba ◽  
Ayşegül Gündüz ◽  
Nevin Pazarcı ◽  
Çiğdem Özkara ◽  
...  

Background and Objective. Auditory startle response (ASR) was normal in juvenile myoclonic epilepsy whereas it was suppressed in progressive myoclonic epilepsy. However, both groups were using valproic acid/Na valproate (VPA) in different doses. Therefore, we aimed to analyze whether VPA has an impact on ASR in a cohort of epilepsy. For this purpose, we included patients with epilepsy and analyzed ASR in patients who were using VPA. Patients and Method. We included 51 consecutive patients who had epilepsy and were using VPA between January 2014 and January 2016. Two control groups of 37 epilepsy patients using other antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) and of 25 healthy subjects were also constituted. All participants underwent investigations of ASR and startle response to somatosensory inputs (SSS) under similar conditions. Results. An analysis of patients using VPA, not using VPA and healthy subjects revealed significantly longer latency and lower probability of orbicularis oculi (O.oc) and sternocleidomastoid responses after auditory stimulation, decreased total ASR probability and longer latency of O.oc response after somatosensory stimulation in patient groups compared with healthy subjects. Multivariate analysis showed type of AED had a role in the generation of abnormalities. VPA, carbamazepine, and multiple AED use caused suppression of ASR. Total ASR probability was decreased or O.oc latency got longer with longer duration of VPA use whereas serum VPA level at the time of investigation did not correlate with total ASR probability. Discussion. Both ASR and SSS are suppressed by the effect of VPA, especially in patients using for a long period and in patients using other AEDs with VPA. Given the fact that VPA leads to long-standing synaptic changes of dopaminergic transmission, abnormalities of this network may be the more likely cause.


1993 ◽  
Vol 76 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1251-1256 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eytan Bachar ◽  
Tuvia Peri ◽  
Rachel Halamish ◽  
Arieh Y. Shalev

Blindness is often associated with hypervigilance and arousal. The auditory startle response has been suggested as a measure of arousal. This study evaluated the auditory startle response of 10 blind individuals and 10 sighted controls who were exposed to a series of 15 1000-Hz, 95-db, 0-rise-time pure-tone stimuli, administered to both ears. The subjects' heart-rate, skin-conductance, and orbicularis-oculi-electromyogram responses to the tones were measured. Blind subjects did not differ from controls in the magnitude and in the habituation-rate of their responses. Results were interpreted as showing that blind persons' capacity for discriminative learning and for regulation of arousal is unimpaired. Task-related anxiety of blind persons should be differentiated from stimulus-related anxiety.


2011 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 176-177
Author(s):  
Joantine Van Esterik ◽  
Celine De Esch ◽  
Reinier Kaiser ◽  
Henk Hendriks ◽  
Roderick Slieker ◽  
...  

2006 ◽  
Vol 174 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. E. Siegelaar ◽  
M. Olff ◽  
L. J. Bour ◽  
D. Veelo ◽  
A. H. Zwinderman ◽  
...  

1996 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 134-138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arieh Y Shalev ◽  
Omer B Bonne ◽  
Tuvia Peri

1964 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 535-540 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harvard L. Armus ◽  
Kristin R. Carlson ◽  
James F. Guinan ◽  
Ronald A. Crowell

Two experiments were carried out in which food-deprived rats received food pellets in the presence of an intermittent light-sound stimulus. The animals were then tested in a stabilimeter device for magnitude of startle reaction to a loud, percussive sound in the presence and absence of the light-sound (secondary reinforcement) stimulus. Exp. I showed a non-significant tendency for the startle amplitude to be less in the presence of the secondary reinforcement stimulus. Exp. II was carried out for 2 test days rather than 1. Results similar to those of Exp. I were found for the first day of testing, the startle being less (non-significantly) in the presence of the secondary reinforcement stimulus. For the second test day, however, this tendency proved to be highly significant ( p < .005). Several interpretations of these findings were discussed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document