Topography of Auditory Evoked Long‐Latency Potentials in Children with Severe Language Impairment: The P2 and N2 Components

Objective: To establish objective neurophysiological correlates of a central auditory processing disorder in impaired language development. The study focused on the differences in latency, amplitude, and topography of the auditory evoked long‐latency components, P2 and N2, and the potential diagnostic value of these parameters. Design: Topographic maps of the late auditory evoked potentials (AEPs) were obtained in a group of 20 children, aged 9 to 15 yr, with severe language impairment (LI) and in a control (C) group of 20 normal children. Stimulus was a pure tone at 500 Hz with a duration of 100 msec and a rise and fall time of 20 msec. The intensity was 75 dB HL. Six test sequences of 50 stimuli at an interval of 1.0 sec were presented to the left and to the right ear separately. The AEPs were recorded and analyzed with the Bio‐Logic Brain Atlas III program. Results: In the topographic maps, a focus of positive potential corresponding to P2(FP2) and a focus of negative potential corresponding to N2 (FN2) were seen in the majority of children, with a similar distribution in the two groups. The latencies of P2 and N2 were significantly longer in the LI group than in the C group, P2 showing the most pronounced difference. The amplitudes of FP2 and FN2 were lower in the LI group. The diagnostic value of the P2 and N2 latency, amplitude, and topography in identifying the LI subjects, was estimated by means of a scoring system. With all three parameters together, the sensitivity was calculated to be 80% and the specificity 80%. Statistical mapping of the latency interval of 135 to 305 msec showed z maps with regions of ≥3 SD in 14 subjects in the LI group and eight subjects in the C group. Conclusions: The deviations in the LI group indicate slower processing in central auditory pathways rather than differences in location and orientation of generators. The deviating topography seen in some LI subjects may reflect the various sites and extent of cerebral dysfunction. The results also support the idea of different generators for the P2 and N2 components. Topographic evaluation of long‐latency AEPs may become a diagnostic tool in language disorders. The scoring system is a potential model in the establishment of individual diagnostic variables.

[1]  B A Schneider,et al.  Developmental changes in masked thresholds. , 1989, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  K. Squires,et al.  Age-related variations in evoked potentials to auditory stimuli in normal human subjects. , 1978, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[3]  Dipole Fields in Rolandic Discharges , 1988 .

[4]  P. Tallal,et al.  Speech acoustic-cue discrimination abilities of normally developing and language-impaired children. , 1981, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[5]  M. Scherg,et al.  Event‐Related Potentials and the Categorical Perception of Speech Sounds , 1995, Ear and hearing.

[6]  R. Harner,et al.  Application of singular value cecomposition to topographic analysis of flash-evoked potentials , 2005, Brain Topography.

[7]  B. Morrongiello,et al.  Auditory sensitivity in preschool children. , 1986, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[8]  W. Ritter,et al.  The sources of auditory evoked responses recorded from the human scalp. , 1970, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[9]  B Renault,et al.  Onset and offset of brain events as indices of mental chronometry. , 1982, Science.

[10]  T. Yamada,et al.  AUDITORY EVENT‐RELATED POTENTIALS AND REACTION TIME IN CHILDREN EVALUATION OF COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT , 1993, Developmental medicine and child neurology.

[11]  H G Vaughan,et al.  Manipulation of event-related potential manifestations of information processing stages. , 1982, Science.

[12]  The neurophysiological evaluation of auditory discrimination. , 1995, Ear and hearing.

[13]  H. G. Vaughan,et al.  Developmental Studies and Clinical Application of Mismatch Negativity: Problems and Prospects , 1995, Ear and hearing.

[14]  C S Watson,et al.  Auditory perception, phonological processing, and reading ability/disability. , 1993, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[15]  M. Scherg,et al.  Evoked dipole source potentials of the human auditory cortex. , 1986, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[16]  T. Carrell,et al.  Mismatch negativity in school-age children to speech stimuli that are just perceptibly different. , 1993, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[17]  R. Näätänen,et al.  Early selective-attention effect on evoked potential reinterpreted. , 1978, Acta psychologica.

[18]  C. Elberling,et al.  Magnetic auditory responses from the human brain. A preliminary report. , 1980, Scandinavian audiology.

[19]  R. Fior,et al.  Physiological maturation of auditory function between 3 and 13 years of age. , 1972, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[20]  Elena Plante,et al.  MRI findings in boys with specific language impairment , 1991, Brain and Language.

[21]  B. Siegenthaler.  Maturation of Auditory Abilities in Children , 1969 .

[22]  Two auditory components in the 130-230 ms range disclosed by their stimulus frequency dependence. , 1994, Neuroreport.

[23]  Daniel B Hier,et al.  Auditory middle latency responses (MLRs) in patients with cortical lesions. , 1982, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[24]  J. Polich,et al.  Normal variation of P300 in children: age, memory span, and head size. , 1990, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[25]  P. Korpilahti,et al.  Auditory ERP components and mismatch negativity in dysphasic children. , 1994, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[26]  R. Näätänen,et al.  Stimulus deviance and evoked potentials , 1982, Biological Psychology.

[27]  G. Jacobson,et al.  Magnetoencephalographic Studies of Auditory System Function , 1994, Journal of clinical neurophysiology : official publication of the American Electroencephalographic Society.

[28]  A. Starr,et al.  Effects of age on the P300 component of the event-related potential from auditory stimuli: peak definition, variation, and measurement. , 1985, Journal of gerontology.

[29]  T. Picton,et al.  Event-related potentials recorded from the scalp and nasopharynx. I. N1 and P2. , 1984, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[30]  J R Hesselink,et al.  Cerebral structure on magnetic resonance imaging in language- and learning-impaired children. , 1991, Archives of neurology.

[31]  A. Schell,et al.  A cross-sectional and longitudinal study of age effects of electrophysiological measures in hyperactive and normal children. , 1984, Biological psychiatry.

[32]  G. Sandini,et al.  Dyslexia: Regional differences in brain electrical activity by topographic mapping , 1980, Annals of neurology.

[33]  S. Mason,et al.  Brain-stem, middle latency and late cortical evoked potentials in children with speech and language disorders. , 1984, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[34]  C. C. Wood,et al.  Task-dependent field potentials in human hippocampal formation , 1989, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.