Literature DB >> 11770670

A longitudinal study of electrode impedance, the electrically evoked compound action potential, and behavioral measures in nucleus 24 cochlear implant users.

M L Hughes1, K R Vander Werff, C J Brown, P J Abbas, D M Kelsay, H F Teagle, M W Lowder.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The primary goal of this study was to examine changes that may occur in electrode impedance, electrically evoked compound action potential (EAP) threshold and slope of the EAP growth function, and behavioral measures of threshold T-level) and maximum comfort (C-level) over time in both adult and child cochlear implant users. Secondary goals were to determine whether changes in these measures are consistent between children and adults, and to determine whether behavioral measures (MAP T- and C-levels) and electrophysiologic measures (EAP thresholds) exhibit the same trends over time.
DESIGN: Thirty-five children and 33 adults implanted with the Nucleus CI24M between November 1996 and August 1999 participated in this study. Subjects were included in this study if 1) they had used their implant for at least 1 yr after device connection, and 2) they had participated in the necessary data collection at a minimum number of the time intervals assessed in this study. EAP threshold, slope of the EAP growth function, and common ground electrode impedance measures were collected intraoperatively, at initial stimulation, and at several subsequent visits up to 2 yr post initial stimulation. MAP T- an d C-levels weremeasured at initial stimulation and at the same time intervals as described above.
RESULTS: Changes in electrode impedance, EAP thresholds, and slope of the EAP growth function from measures made intraoperatively, at initial stimulation, and at 1 to 2 mo post initial stimulation were similar in both children and adults. Beyond the 1- to 2-mo visit, children exhibited significant increases in electrode impedance, EAP thresholds, slope, and MAP T-levels, whereas these samemeasures in adults remained relatively stable. EAP thresholds in children stabilized by the 3- to 8-mo visit, and electrode impedance stabilized by the 6- to 8-mo visit, while slope of the EAP growth function, MAP T-levels,and MAP C-levels werestable by 1 yr post initial stimulation. C-levels in adults increased up to 1 yr post initial stimulation; however, the amount of increase was much smaller than that seen in children. In both children and adults, longitudinal trends in EAP thresholds mirrored T-level more closely than C-level.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that peripheral changes occur in many children that do not generally occur in adults within the first year of cochlear implant use. One implication of these results is that if EAP thresholds are to be used to assist in programming the speech processor for children, it is best to make those measures at the same time interval as device programming rather than using measures made intraoperatively or at the initial programming session to set MAP levels at later visits.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11770670     DOI: 10.1097/00003446-200112000-00004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ear Hear        ISSN: 0196-0202            Impact factor:   3.570


  42 in total

1.  Electrophysiological Correlates of Behavioral Comfort Levels in Cochlear Implantees: A Prospective Study.

Authors:  S Raghunandhan; A Ravikumar; Mohan Kameswaran; Kalyani Mandke; R Ranjith
Journal:  Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2013-10-16

2.  Programming peculiarities in two cochlear implant users with superficial siderosis of the central nervous system.

Authors:  Aline Gomes Bittencourt; Maria Valéria Schmidt Goffi-Gomez; Mariana Hausen Pinna; Ricardo Ferreira Bento; Rubens de Brito; Robinson Koji Tsuji
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2012-01-26       Impact factor: 2.503

3.  A longitudinal study of speech perception skills and device characteristics of adolescent cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Elizabeth J Robinson; Lisa S Davidson; Rosalie M Uchanski; Christine M Brenner; Ann E Geers
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 1.664

4.  Forward-masked spatial tuning curves in cochlear implant users.

Authors:  David A Nelson; Gail S Donaldson; Heather Kreft
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Effects of Stimulus Polarity and Artifact Reduction Method on the Electrically Evoked Compound Action Potential.

Authors:  Michelle L Hughes; Jenny L Goehring; Jacquelyn L Baudhuin
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2017 May/Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

6.  Factors affecting perceptual thresholds in epiretinal prostheses.

Authors:  Chloé de Balthasar; Sweta Patel; Arup Roy; Ricardo Freda; Scott Greenwald; Alan Horsager; Manjunatha Mahadevappa; Douglas Yanai; Matthew J McMahon; Mark S Humayun; Robert J Greenberg; James D Weiland; Ione Fine
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 4.799

7.  What can stimulus polarity and interphase gap tell us about auditory nerve function in cochlear-implant recipients?

Authors:  Michelle L Hughes; Sangsook Choi; Erin Glickman
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2017-12-28       Impact factor: 3.208

8.  Delayed changes in auditory status in cochlear implant users with preserved acoustic hearing.

Authors:  Rachel A Scheperle; Viral D Tejani; Julia K Omtvedt; Carolyn J Brown; Paul J Abbas; Marlan R Hansen; Bruce J Gantz; Jacob J Oleson; Marie V Ozanne
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2017-04-12       Impact factor: 3.208

9.  Comparison of electrically evoked compound action potential thresholds and loudness estimates for the stimuli used to program the Advanced Bionics cochlear implant.

Authors:  Eun Kyung Jeon; Carolyn J Brown; Christine P Etler; Sara O'Brien; Li-Kuei Chiou; Paul J Abbas
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 1.664

10.  Effects of long-term use of a cochlear implant on the electrically evoked compound action potential.

Authors:  Carolyn J Brown; Paul J Abbas; Christine P Etlert; Sara O'Brient; Jacob J Oleson
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 1.664

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.