Dichotic-listening performance and intracarotid injections of amobarbital in children and adolescents: Preoperative and postoperative comparisons

Archives of Neurology

Volumn 54, Issue 12, 1997, Pages 1494-1500

  Hugdahl, Kenneth ^a   Carlsson, Göran ^c   Uvebrant, Paul ^d   Lundervold, Astri J ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BERGEN   (Norway)

^b HAUKELAND UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Norway)

^c UNIVERSITY OF KIEL   (Germany)

^d SAHLGRENSKA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AMOBARBITAL;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; BRAIN FUNCTION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; DICHOTIC LISTENING; DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS; DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; EPILEPSY; HEMISPHERIC DOMINANCE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PREOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE DIAGNOSIS; SCHOOL CHILD;

EID: 0030779675     PISSN: 00039942     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/archneur.1997.00550240046011     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Bryden MP. An overview of the dichotic listening procedure and its relation to cerebral organization. In: Hugdahl K, ed. Handbook of Dichotic Listening: Theory, Methods, and Research. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Inc: 1988:1-44.
2. Hugdahl K. Dichotic listening: probing temporal lobe functional integrity. In: Davidson RJ, Hugdahl K, eds. Brain Asymmetry. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press; 1995:123-156.
3. Näätänen R. Processing negativity: an evoked potential reflection of selective attention. Psychol Bull. 1982;92:605-640.
4. Hillyard SA, Hink RF, Schwent VL, Picton TW. Electrical signs of selective attention in the human brain. Science. 1973;182:177-180.
5. Christianson SA, Nilsson LG, Silfvenius H. Initial memory deficits and subsequent recovery in two cases of head trauma. Scand J Psychol. 1986;28:267-280.
6. Hugdahl K, Asbjo̊rnsen A, Wester K. Memory performance in Parkinson's disease. Neuropsychiatry Neuropsychol Behav Neurol. 1993;6:170-176.
7. Jäncke L, Steinmetz H. Auditory lateralisation and planum temporale asymmetry. Neuroreport. 1993;5:169-172.
8. Kimura D. Some effects of temporal-lobe damage on auditory perception. Can J Psychol. 1961;15:156-165.
9. Strauss E. Dichotic listening and sodium Amytal: functional and morphological aspects of hemispheric asymmetry. In: Hugdahl K, ed. Handbook of Dichotic Listening: Theory, Methods, and Research. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Inc; 1988;117-138.
10. Wada J. A new method for the determination of the side of cerebral speech dominance: a preliminary report on the intracarotid injection of sodium Amytal in man [in Japanese]. Med Biol 1949;14:221-222.
11. Wada J, Ramussen T. Intracarotid injection of sodium Amytal for the lateralization of cerebral speech dominance. J Neurol. 1969;21:399-405.
12. Berlin CI, Lowe-Bell SS, Cullen JK Jr, Thompson CL, Stafford MR. Is speech 'special?' perhaps the temporal lobectomy patient can tell us. J Acoust Soc Am. 1972; 52:702-705.
13. Efron R, Crandall PH. Central auditory processing, II: effects of temporal lobectomy. Brain Lang. 1983;19:237-253.
14. Goodglass H. Binaural digit presentation and early lateral brain damage. Cortex. 1967;3:295-306
15. Oxbury JM, Oxbury SM. Effects of temporal lobectomy on the report of dichotically presented digits. Cortex. 1969;5:3-14.
16. Zatorre R. Preceptual asymmetries on the dichotic fused words test and cerebral speech lateralization determined by the carotid sodium Amytal test. Neuropsychology. 1989;27:1207-1219.
17. Lee GP, Loring DW, Varney NR, et al. Do dichotic word listening asymmetries predict side of temporal lobe seizure onset? Epilepsy Res. 1994;19:153-160.
18. Grote CL, Pierre-Louis SJ, Smith MC, Roberts RJ, Varney NR. Significance of unilateral ear extinction on the dichotic listening test. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 1995;17:1-8.
19. Studdert-Kennedy M, Shankweiler DP. Hemispheric specialization for speech perception. J Acoust Soc Am. 1970;48:579-594.
20. Hugdahl K. Considerations in the use of dichotic listening with children. In: Tramontana MG, Hooper SR, eds. Advances in Child Neuropsychology. Boston, Mass: Birkhauser Inc; 1992;1:137-167.
21. Hugdahl K, Andersson L. The 'forced-attention paradigm' in dichotic listening to CV-syllables: a comparison between adults and children. Cortex. 1986;22:417-432.
22. Geffen G, Wale J. The development of selective listening and hemispheric asymmetry. Dev Psychol. 1979;15:138-146.
23. Hiscock M, Kinsbourne M. Asymmetries of selective listening and attention switching in children. Dev Psychol. 1980;16:70-82.
24. Cohen M, Hynd GW, Hugdahl K. Dichotic listening performance in subtypes of developmental dyslexia and a left temporal lobe tumor contrast group. Brain Lang. 1992;42:187-202.
25. Hugdahl K, Helland T, Faerevaag MK, Lyssand ET, Asbjo̊rnsen A. Absence of ear advantage on the consonant-vowel dichotic listening test in adolescent and adult dyslexies: specific auditory-phonetic dysfunction. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 1996; 17:833-840.
26. Bø O, Hugdahl K, Marklund E. Dichotic listening in children with serious language problems. Percept Mot Skills. 1989;68:1291-1301.
27. Kimura D. Functional asymmetry of the brain in dichotic listening. Cortex. 1967; 3:163-168.
28. Clarke JM, Lufkin RB, Zaidel E. Corpus callosum morphometry and dichotic listening performance: individual differences in functional interhemispheric inhibition. Neuropsychology. 1993;31:547-557.
29. Anderson KC, Brown PC, Taal P. Developmental language disorders: evidence for a basic processing deficit. Curr Opin Neurol. 1993;6:98-106.