Literature DB >> 11033261

Chronic microstimulation in the feline ventral cochlear nucleus: physiologic and histologic effects.

D B McCreery1, T G Yuen, L A Bullara.   

Abstract

This study was conducted to help to establish the feasibility of a multi-channel auditory prosthesis based on microstimulation within the human ventral cochlear nucleus, and to define the range of stimulus parameters that can be used safely with such a device. We chronically implanted activated iridium microelectrodes into the feline ventral cochlear nucleus and, beginning 80-250 days after implantation, they were pulsed for 7 h/day, on up to 21 successive days. The stimulus was charge-balanced pulses whose amplitude was modulated by a simulated human voice. The pulse rate (250 Hz/electrode) and the maximum pulse amplitude were selected as those that are likely to provide a patient with useful auditory percepts. The changes in neuronal responses during the multi-day stimulation regimens were partitioned into long-lasting, stimulation-induced depression of neuronal excitability (SIDNE), and short-acting neuronal refractivity (SANR). Both SIDNE and SANR were quantified from the changes in the growth functions of the evoked potentials recorded in the inferior colliculus. All of the stimulation regimens that we tested induced measurable SIDNE and SANR. The combined effect of SIDNE and the superimposed SANR is to depress the neuronal response near threshold, and thereby, to depress the population response over the entire amplitude range of the stimulus pulses. SIDNE and SANR may cause the greatest degradation of the performance of a clinical device at the low end of the amplitude range, and this may represent an inherent limitation of this type of spatially localized, high-rate neuronal stimulation. We determined sets of stimulus parameters which preserved most of the dynamic range of the neuronal response, when using either long (150 micros/phase) or short (40 micros/phase) stimulus pulses. Increasing the amplitude of the stimulus was relatively ineffective as a means of increasing the dynamic range of neuronal response, since the greater stimulus amplitude induced more SIDNE. All of the pulsed and unpulsed electrode sites were examined histologically, and no neuronal changes attributable to the stimulation were detected. There was some aggregation of glial cells immediately adjacent to some of the electrodes that were pulsed with the short-duration pulses, and at the highest current densities.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11033261     DOI: 10.1016/s0378-5955(00)00190-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hear Res        ISSN: 0378-5955            Impact factor:   3.208


  14 in total

Review 1.  Neural prostheses.

Authors:  A Prochazka; V K Mushahwar; D B McCreery
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2001-05-15       Impact factor: 5.182

2.  The effects of intraspinal microstimulation on spinal cord tissue in the rat.

Authors:  Jeremy A Bamford; Kathryn G Todd; Vivian K Mushahwar
Journal:  Biomaterials       Date:  2010-04-28       Impact factor: 12.479

3.  Sputtered iridium oxide films (SIROFs) for low-impedance neural stimulation and recording electrodes.

Authors:  S F Cogan; T D Plante; J Ehrlich
Journal:  Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc       Date:  2004

4.  Responses of neurons in the feline inferior colliculus to modulated electrical stimuli applied on and within the ventral cochlear nucleus; Implications for an advanced auditory brainstem implant.

Authors:  Douglas McCreery; Kamal Yadev; Martin Han
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2018-03-09       Impact factor: 3.208

5.  The development of neural stimulators: a review of preclinical safety and efficacy studies.

Authors:  Robert K Shepherd; Joel Villalobos; Owen Burns; David A X Nayagam
Journal:  J Neural Eng       Date:  2018-05-14       Impact factor: 5.379

Review 6.  [Central auditory prosthesis].

Authors:  T Lenarz; H Lim; G Joseph; G Reuter; M Lenarz
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 1.284

7.  Bidirectional telemetry controller for neuroprosthetic devices.

Authors:  Vishnu Sharma; Douglas B McCreery; Martin Han; Victor Pikov
Journal:  IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng       Date:  2009-11-20       Impact factor: 3.802

Review 8.  Auditory brainstem implants.

Authors:  Marc S Schwartz; Steven R Otto; Robert V Shannon; William E Hitselberger; Derald E Brackmann
Journal:  Neurotherapeutics       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 7.620

Review 9.  Tissue damage thresholds during therapeutic electrical stimulation.

Authors:  Stuart F Cogan; Kip A Ludwig; Cristin G Welle; Pavel Takmakov
Journal:  J Neural Eng       Date:  2016-01-20       Impact factor: 5.379

Review 10.  Conducting Polymers for Neural Prosthetic and Neural Interface Applications.

Authors:  Rylie Green; Mohammad Reza Abidian
Journal:  Adv Mater       Date:  2015-09-28       Impact factor: 30.849

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.