Literature DB >> 17216585

Implications of deep electrode insertion on cochlear implant fitting.

Mathieu Gani1, Gregory Valentini, Alain Sigrist, Maria-Izabel Kós, Colette Boëx.   

Abstract

Using long Med-El Combi40+ electrode arrays, it is now possible to cover the whole range of the cochlea, up to about two turns. Such insertion depths have received little attention. To evaluate the contribution of deeply inserted electrodes, five Med-El cochlear implant users were tested on vowel and consonant identification tests with fittings with first one, two, and up to five apical electrodes being deactivated. In addition, subjects performed pitch-ranking experiments, using loudness-balanced stimuli, to identify electrodes creating pitch confusions. Radiographs were taken to measure each electrode insertion depth. All subjects used each modified fitting for two periods of about 3 weeks. During the experiment, the same stimulation rate and frequency range were maintained across all the fittings used for each individual subject. After each trial period the subject had to perform three consonant and three vowel identification tests. All subjects showed deep electrode insertions ranging from 605 degrees to 720 degrees. The two subjects with the deepest electrode insertions showed significantly increased vowel- and consonant-identification performances with fittings with the two or three most apical electrodes deactivated compared to their standard fitting with all available electrodes activated. The other three subjects did not show significant improvements in performance when one or two of their most apical electrodes were deactivated. Four out of five subjects preferred to continue use of a fitting with one or more apical electrodes deactivated. The two subjects with the deepest insertions also showed pitch confusions between their most apical electrodes. Two possible reasons for these results are discussed. One is to reduce neural interactions related to electrodes producing pitch confusions. Another is to improve the alignment of the frequency components of sounds coded by the electrical signals delivered to each electrode to the overall pitch of the auditory perception produced by the electrical stimulation of auditory nerve fibers.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17216585      PMCID: PMC2538415          DOI: 10.1007/s10162-006-0065-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol        ISSN: 1438-7573


  35 in total

1.  The Clarion electrode positioner: temporal bone studies.

Authors:  J N Fayad; W Luxford; F H Linthicum
Journal:  Am J Otol       Date:  2000-03

2.  Adaptation by normal listeners to upward spectral shifts of speech: implications for cochlear implants.

Authors:  S Rosen; A Faulkner; L Wilkinson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Investigating perceptual features of electrode stimulation via a multidimensional scaling paradigm.

Authors:  L M Collins; C S Throckmorton
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Speech recognition under conditions of frequency-place compression and expansion.

Authors:  Deniz Baskent; Robert V Shannon
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  The effects of short-term training for spectrally mismatched noise-band speech.

Authors:  Qian-Jie Fu; John J Galvin
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Perceptual learning following changes in the frequency-to-electrode assignment with the Nucleus-22 cochlear implant.

Authors:  Qian-Jie Fu; Robert V Shannon; John J Galvin
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Deep electrode insertion in cochlear implants: apical morphology, electrodes and speech perception results.

Authors:  Ingeborg Hochmair; Wolfgang Arnold; Peter Nopp; Claude Jolly; Joachim Müller; Peter Roland
Journal:  Acta Otolaryngol       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 1.494

8.  Forward masking in different cochlear implant systems.

Authors:  Colette Boëx; Maria-Izabel Kós; Marco Pelizzone
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Adaptation by a cochlear-implant patient to upward shifts in the frequency representation of speech.

Authors:  Michael F Dorman; Darlene Ketten
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 3.570

10.  Pitch perception for different modes of stimulation using the cochlear multiple-electrode prosthesis.

Authors:  P A Busby; L A Whitford; P J Blamey; L M Richardson; G M Clark
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1994-05       Impact factor: 1.840

View more
  30 in total

1.  A new software tool to optimize frequency table selection for cochlear implants.

Authors:  Daniel Jethanamest; Chin-Tuan Tan; Matthew B Fitzgerald; Mario A Svirsky
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 2.311

2.  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

3.  Psychophysical assessment of stimulation sites in auditory prosthesis electrode arrays.

Authors:  Bryan E Pfingst; Rose A Burkholder-Juhasz; Teresa A Zwolan; Li Xu
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2007-11-28       Impact factor: 3.208

4.  Considerations for design of future cochlear implant electrode arrays: electrode array stiffness, size, and depth of insertion.

Authors:  Stephen J Rebscher; Alexander Hetherington; Ben Bonham; Peter Wardrop; David Whinney; Patricia A Leake
Journal:  J Rehabil Res Dev       Date:  2008

5.  A Smartphone Application for Customized Frequency Table Selection in Cochlear Implants.

Authors:  Daniel Jethanamest; Mahan Azadpour; Annette M Zeman; Elad Sagi; Mario A Svirsky
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 2.311

6.  Feasibility of real-time selection of frequency tables in an acoustic simulation of a cochlear implant.

Authors:  Matthew B Fitzgerald; Elad Sagi; Tasnim A Morbiwala; Chin-Tuan Tan; Mario A Svirsky
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2013 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.570

7.  Perceptual changes in place of stimulation with long cochlear implant electrode arrays.

Authors:  David M Landsberger; Griet Mertens; Andrea Kleine Punte; Paul Van De Heyning
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Cochlear implantation with the nucleus slim modiolar electrode (CI532): a preliminary experience.

Authors:  Domenico Cuda; Alessandra Murri
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2017-10-14       Impact factor: 2.503

9.  Role of electrode placement as a contributor to variability in cochlear implant outcomes.

Authors:  Charles C Finley; Timothy A Holden; Laura K Holden; Bruce R Whiting; Richard A Chole; Gail J Neely; Timothy E Hullar; Margaret W Skinner
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 2.311

10.  Chemical stimulation of adherent cells by localized application of acetylcholine from a microfluidic system.

Authors:  Susanne Zibek; Britta Hagmeyer; Alfred Stett; Martin Stelzle
Journal:  Front Neuroeng       Date:  2010-11-26
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.