Literature DB >> 18091105

Interaural time and level difference thresholds for acoustically presented signals in post-lingually deafened adults fitted with bilateral cochlear implants using CIS+ processing.

D Wesley Grantham1, Daniel H Ashmead, Todd A Ricketts, David S Haynes, Robert F Labadie.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The main purpose of the study was to measure thresholds for interaural time differences (ITDs) and interaural level differences (ILDs) for acoustically presented noise signals in adults with bilateral cochlear implants (CIs). A secondary purpose was to assess the correlation between the ILD and ITD thresholds and error scores in a horizontal-plane localization task, to test the hypothesis that localization by individuals with bilateral implants is mediated by the processing of ILD cues.
DESIGN: Eleven adults, all postlingually deafened and all bilaterally fitted with MED-EL COMBI 40+ CIs, were tested in ITD and ILD discrimination tasks in which signals were presented acoustically through headphones that fit over their two devices. The stimulus was a 200-msec burst of Gaussian noise bandpass filtered from 100 to 4000 Hz. A two-interval forced-choice adaptive procedure was used in which the subject had to respond on each trial whether the lateral positions of the two sound images (with the interaural difference favoring the left and right sides in the two intervals) moved from left-to-right or right-to-left.
RESULTS: In agreement with previously reported data, ITD thresholds for the subjects with bilateral implants were poor. The best threshold was approximately 400 microsec, and only five of 11 subjects tested achieved thresholds <1000 microsec. In contrast, ILD thresholds were relatively good; mean threshold was 3.8 dB with the initial compression circuit on the implant devices activated and 1.9 dB with the compression deactivated. The ILD and ITD thresholds were higher than previously reported thresholds obtained with direct electrical stimulation (generally, <1.0 dB and 100 to 200 microsec, respectively). When the data from two outlying subjects were omitted, ILD thresholds were highly correlated with total error score in a horizontal-plane localization task, computed for sources near midline (r = 0.87, p < 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: The higher ILD and ITD thresholds obtained in this study with acoustically presented signals (when compared with prior data with direct electrical stimulation) can be attributed-at least partially-to the signal processing carried out by the CI in the former case. The processing strategy effectively leaves only envelope information as a basis for ITD discrimination, which, for the acoustically presented noise stimuli, is mainly coded in the onset information. The operation of the compression circuit reduces the ILDs in the signal, leading to elevated ILD thresholds for the acoustically presented signals in this condition. The large magnitude of the ITD thresholds indicates that ITDs could not have contributed to the performance in the horizontal-plane localization task. Overall, the results suggest that for subjects using bilateral implants, localization of noise signals is mediated entirely by ILD cues, with little or no contribution from ITD information.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18091105     DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31815d636f

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


  58 in total

1.  Temporal weighting of interaural time and level differences in high-rate click trains.

Authors:  Andrew D Brown; G Christopher Stecker
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Temporal weighting of binaural cues revealed by detection of dynamic interaural differences in high-rate Gabor click trains.

Authors:  G Christopher Stecker; Andrew D Brown
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Channel Interaction and Current Level Affect Across-Electrode Integration of Interaural Time Differences in Bilateral Cochlear-Implant Listeners.

Authors:  Katharina Egger; Piotr Majdak; Bernhard Laback
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2015-09-16

4.  Sound source localization by hearing preservation patients with and without symmetrical low-frequency acoustic hearing.

Authors:  Louise H Loiselle; Michael F Dorman; William A Yost; René H Gifford
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2015-04-01       Impact factor: 1.854

5.  Cochlear Implantation for Single-Sided Deafness: A New Treatment Paradigm.

Authors:  Daniel M Zeitler; Michael F Dorman
Journal:  J Neurol Surg B Skull Base       Date:  2019-02-04

6.  Sensitivity of inferior colliculus neurons to interaural time differences in the envelope versus the fine structure with bilateral cochlear implants.

Authors:  Zachary M Smith; Bertrand Delgutte
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2008-02-20       Impact factor: 2.714

7.  Speech recognition by bilateral cochlear implant users in a cocktail-party setting.

Authors:  Philipos C Loizou; Yi Hu; Ruth Litovsky; Gongqiang Yu; Robert Peters; Jennifer Lake; Peter Roland
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Lateralization of Interaural Level Differences with Multiple Electrode Stimulation in Bilateral Cochlear-Implant Listeners.

Authors:  Olga A Stakhovskaya; Matthew J Goupell
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2017 Jan/Feb       Impact factor: 3.570

9.  Bimodal Hearing or Bilateral Cochlear Implants? Ask the Patient.

Authors:  René H Gifford; Michael F Dorman
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2019 May/Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

10.  Neural Coding of Interaural Time Differences with Bilateral Cochlear Implants in Unanesthetized Rabbits.

Authors:  Yoojin Chung; Kenneth E Hancock; Bertrand Delgutte
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2016-05-18       Impact factor: 6.167

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.