Home Email this page Print this page Bookmark this page Decrease font size Default font size Increase font size
Noise & Health  
 CURRENT ISSUE    PAST ISSUES    AHEAD OF PRINT    SEARCH   GET E-ALERTS    
 
 Next article
 Previous article
Table of Contents

Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
Citation Manager
Access Statistics
Reader Comments
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1783    
    Printed75    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded20    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal

 

 ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 20  |  Issue : 93  |  Page : 47--52

Effects of parenteral papaverine and piracetam administration on cochlea following acoustic trauma


1 Ankara Numune Education and Research Hospital ENT Clinic, Ankara, Turkey
2 Celal Bayar University School of Vocational Health Service, Department of Histology and Embryology, Manisa, Turkey

Correspondence Address:
Rauf O Kum
Ankara Numune Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi KBB Kliniği, 06110 Altındag, Ankara
Turkey
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/nah.NAH_31_17

Rights and Permissions

Introduction: Noise exposure, the main cause of hearing loss in countries with lot of industries, may result both in temporary or permanent hearing loss. The goal of this study was to investigate the effects of parenteral papaverine and piracetam administration following an acoustic trauma on hearing function with histopathologic correlation. Materials and Methods: Eighteen Wistar albino rats exposed to noise for 8 h in a free environment were included. We divided the study population into three groups, and performed daily intraperitoneal injections of papaverine, piracetam, and saline, respectively, throughout the study. We investigated the histopathologic effects of cellular apoptosis on inner hair cells (IHCs) and outer hair cells (OHCs) and compared the distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) thresholds among the groups. Results and Discussion: On the 3rd and 7th days, DPOAE thresholds at 8 kHz were significantly higher both in papaverine and piracetam groups compared with the control group (P = 0.004 for 3rd day, P = 0.016 and P = 0.028 for 7th day, respectively). On the 14th day, piracetam group had significantly higher mean thresholds at 8 kHz (P = 0.029); however, papaverine group had similar mean thresholds compared to the control group (P = 0.200). On the 3rd and 7th days following acoustic trauma, both IHC and OHC loss were significantly lower in both papaverine and piracetam groups. On the 7th day, the mean amount of apoptotic IHCs and OHCs identified using Caspase-3 method were significantly lower in both groups, but the mean amount identified using terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase dUTP nick end labeling method were similar in both groups compared to the control group. Conclusion: We demonstrated the effects of papaverine and piracetam on the recovery of cochlear damage due to acoustic trauma on experimental animals using histopathologic and electrophysiologic examinations.






[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*


        
Print this article     Email this article