Literature DB >> 16644157

Effect of interphase gap and pulse duration on electrically evoked potentials is correlated with auditory nerve survival.

Pavel Prado-Guitierrez1, Leonie M Fewster, John M Heasman, Colette M McKay, Robert K Shepherd.   

Abstract

We investigated the effect of pulse duration (PD) and interphase-gap (IPG) on the electrically-evoked auditory brain stem response (EABR) and viiith nerve compound action potential (ECAP) of deafened guinea pigs in order to test the hypothesis that the extent of change in these neural responses is affected by the histological status of the auditory nerve. Fifteen guinea pigs were deafened by co-administration of kanamycin and furosemide. Animals were acutely implanted with an 8-band electrode array at 1, 4 or 12 weeks following deafening. EABR and ECAP input/output functions were recorded in response to charge balanced biphasic current pulses. We determined the change in current required to equalize; (i) the EABR amplitude when the duration of the current pulse was doubled (104-208 micros/phase); and (ii) the EABR and ECAP amplitudes when the IPG was increased from 8 to 58 micros using a 104 micros/phase current pulse. Following the completion of each experiment the cochleae were examined quantitatively for spiral ganglion neuron survival. As expected, the current level required to evoke an EABR with equal amplitude was lower when the animal was stimulated with current pulses of 208 compared with 104 micros/phase. Moreover, the current level required to evoke EABR/ECAPs with equal amplitude was lower when current pulses had an IPG of 58 versus 8 micros. Importantly, there was a reduction in the magnitude of this effect with greater neural loss; the reduced efficacy of changing both PD and IPG on these electrically-evoked potentials was statistically correlated with neural survival. These results may provide a tool for investigating the contribution of auditory nerve survival to clinical performance among cochlear implant subjects.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16644157      PMCID: PMC1831823          DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2006.03.006

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


  43 in total

1.  Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve: single neuron strength-duration functions in deafened animals.

Authors:  R K Shepherd; N A Hardie; J H Baxi
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 3.934

2.  Electrically evoked whole-nerve action potentials: data from human cochlear implant users.

Authors:  C J Brown; P J Abbas; B Gantz
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1990-09       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Effect of inter-phase gap on the sensitivity of cochlear implant users to electrical stimulation.

Authors:  Robert P Carlyon; Astrid van Wieringen; John M Deeks; Christopher J Long; Johannes Lyzenga; Jan Wouters
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 3.208

4.  Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve: direct current measurement in vivo.

Authors:  C Q Huang; R K Shepherd; P M Carter; P M Seligman; B Tabor
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 4.538

5.  Antidromic responses of single units from the spiral ganglion.

Authors:  M C Brown
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1994-05       Impact factor: 2.714

6.  Sensorineural hearing loss during development: morphological and physiological response of the cochlea and auditory brainstem.

Authors:  N A Hardie; R K Shepherd
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 3.208

7.  Long-term sensorineural hearing loss induces functional changes in the rat auditory nerve.

Authors:  Robert K Shepherd; Lloyd A Roberts; Antonio G Paolini
Journal:  Eur J Neurosci       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 3.386

8.  Functional responses from guinea pigs with cochlear implants. I. Electrophysiological and psychophysical measures.

Authors:  C A Miller; K E Woodruff; B E Pfingst
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 3.208

9.  Survival of spiral ganglion cells in profound sensorineural hearing loss: implications for cochlear implantation.

Authors:  J B Nadol; Y S Young; R J Glynn
Journal:  Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol       Date:  1989-06       Impact factor: 1.547

10.  Auditory-nerve single-neuron thresholds to electrical stimulation from scala tympani electrodes.

Authors:  C W Parkins; J Colombo
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1987-12-31       Impact factor: 3.208

View more
  71 in total

Review 1.  Probing the electrode-neuron interface with focused cochlear implant stimulation.

Authors:  Julie Arenberg Bierer
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2010-06

2.  Examining the auditory nerve fiber response to high rate cochlear implant stimulation: chronic sensorineural hearing loss and facilitation.

Authors:  Leon F Heffer; David J Sly; James B Fallon; Mark W White; Robert K Shepherd; Stephen J O'Leary
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2010-10-06       Impact factor: 2.714

3.  Effect of stimulus level on the temporal response properties of the auditory nerve in cochlear implants.

Authors:  Michelle L Hughes; Sarah A Laurello
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2017-06-13       Impact factor: 3.208

4.  A behavioral method to estimate charge integration efficiency in cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Ning Zhou; Lixue Dong; John J Galvin
Journal:  J Neurosci Methods       Date:  2020-06-06       Impact factor: 2.390

5.  What Can be Learned from the Time Course of Changes in Low-Frequency Stimulated Muscle?

Authors:  Dirk Pette
Journal:  Eur J Transl Myol       Date:  2017-06-24

6.  Penetrating electrode stimulation of the rabbit optic nerve: parameters and effects on evoked cortical potentials.

Authors:  Jingjing Sun; Yao Chen; Xinyu Chai; Qiushi Ren; Liming Li
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2013-09-08       Impact factor: 3.117

7.  Interphase gap as a means to reduce electrical stimulation thresholds for epiretinal prostheses.

Authors:  Andrew C Weitz; Matthew R Behrend; Ashish K Ahuja; Punita Christopher; Jianing Wei; Varalakshmi Wuyyuru; Uday Patel; Robert J Greenberg; Mark S Humayun; Robert H Chow; James D Weiland
Journal:  J Neural Eng       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 5.379

8.  Effects of hearing preservation on psychophysical responses to cochlear implant stimulation.

Authors:  Stephen Y Kang; Deborah J Colesa; Donald L Swiderski; Gina L Su; Yehoash Raphael; Bryan E Pfingst
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2009-11-10

9.  Across-site patterns of electrically evoked compound action potential amplitude-growth functions in multichannel cochlear implant recipients and the effects of the interphase gap.

Authors:  Kara C Schvartz-Leyzac; Bryan E Pfingst
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2016-08-10       Impact factor: 3.208

10.  A relation between electrode discrimination and amplitude modulation detection by cochlear implant listeners.

Authors:  Monita Chatterjee; Jian Yu
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 1.840

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.