Literature DB >> 17536200

Cochlear implant channel separation and its influence on speech perception--implications for a new electrode design.

Christoph Arnoldner1, Dominik Riss, Wolf-Dieter Baumgartner, Alexandra Kaider, Jafar-Sasan Hamzavi.   

Abstract

There are a variety of factors which can influence cochlear implantation outcome. Channel interaction is one of the variables responsible for audiological performance deterioration in multichannel implants. Electrode design is--among others--one way to decrease the incidence of channel interaction. At present, electrodes differ in overall length, diameter, contact design and distribution, but none of the electrodes available have a distinct variability in the amount of space between contacts across the length of the electrode. The aim of this study was to investigate whether a new electrode design featuring larger contact spacing in the apical part of deeply inserted electrodes would lead to an increase in speech perception. Eighteen postlingually deafened patients fitted with MedEl Combi 40+ or MedEl Pulsar cochlear implants using the MedEl implementation of continuous interleaved sampling participated in this study. Patients were tested in 6 conditions, in which the channel spacing and distribution of electrode contacts in each patient were artificially varied by activating or deactivating different channels. Performance was tested immediately after each change in setup with a monosyllable and sentence test (Hochmaier, Schultz and Moser). Our results showed that the condition with the highest distance between contacts in the apical part (up to 6.4 mm instead of 2.4 mm) is the most effective for the matched map condition: the results improved statistically significantly for the sentence test from 72% in the standard 12-channel condition to 83.2% and from 40.8 to 50% for the monosyllable test. Based on these findings, we present a new electrode design which can help achieve further increases in speech perception with cochlear implants.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17536200     DOI: 10.1159/000103212

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Audiol Neurootol        ISSN: 1420-3030            Impact factor:   1.854


  9 in total

1.  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

2.  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

3.  The Relationship Between Insertion Angles, Default Frequency Allocations, and Spiral Ganglion Place Pitch in Cochlear Implants.

Authors:  David M Landsberger; Maja Svrakic; J Thomas Roland; Mario Svirsky
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2015 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.570

4.  Insertion Depth and Cochlear Implant Speech Recognition Outcomes: A Comparative Study of 28- and 31.5-mm Lateral Wall Arrays.

Authors:  Michael W Canfarotta; Margaret T Dillon; Kevin D Brown; Harold C Pillsbury; Matthew M Dedmon; Brendan P O'Connell
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2022-02-01       Impact factor: 2.311

5.  Influence of bone morphogenetic protein-2 on spiral ganglion neurite growth in vitro.

Authors:  Stefan Volkenstein; D Brors; S Hansen; A Minovi; M Laub; H P Jennissen; S Dazert; A Neumann
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2009-03-06       Impact factor: 2.503

6.  Incidence of Complete Insertion in Cochlear Implant Recipients of Long Lateral Wall Arrays.

Authors:  Michael W Canfarotta; Margaret T Dillon; Kevin D Brown; Harold C Pillsbury; Matthew M Dedmon; Brendan P O'Connell
Journal:  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2021-02-16       Impact factor: 5.591

7.  Design and evaluation of a cochlear implant strategy based on a "Phantom" channel.

Authors:  Waldo Nogueira; Leonid M Litvak; Aniket A Saoji; Andreas Büchner
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-03-25       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Interaction Between Electric and Acoustic Stimulation Influences Speech Perception in Ipsilateral EAS Users.

Authors:  Marina Imsiecke; Benjamin Krüger; Andreas Büchner; Thomas Lenarz; Waldo Nogueira
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2020 Jul/Aug       Impact factor: 3.570

Review 9.  Recent Advances in Cochlear Implant Electrode Array Design Parameters.

Authors:  Yavuz Nuri Ertas; Derya Ozpolat; Saime Nur Karasu; Nureddin Ashammakhi
Journal:  Micromachines (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-08       Impact factor: 3.523

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.