JAAHA Track the topics, authors and articles important to you
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mansfield, P.
Right arrow Articles by Marshall, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Mansfield, P.
Right arrow Articles by Marshall, A.
Journal of the American Animal Hospital Association, Vol 33, Issue 6, 479-486
Copyright © 1997 by American Animal Hospital Association

Articles

The effects of four, commercial ceruminolytic agents on the middle ear

PD Mansfield, JE Steiss, TR Boosinger, and AE Marshall

Four, commercially available ceruminolytic agents and physiological saline were screened for ototoxic and inflammatory reactions on the middle ear mucosae of guinea pigs (n = 38) and dogs (n = 24). Each solution was injected transtympanically in anesthetized animals. The effects were assessed by brain stem auditory evoked response (BAER) tests to evaluate hearing function and by histological examination of the middle ear structures. Varying degrees of hearing loss and inflammation were observed in some guinea pigs and dogs treated with solutions A, C, and D, whereas no abnormal finding was associated with solution B or saline.




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1997 by the American Animal Hospital Association.