Literature DB >> 19513792

Interaural time-delay sensitivity in bilateral cochlear implant users: effects of pulse rate, modulation rate, and place of stimulation.

Richard J M van Hoesel1, Gary L Jones, Ruth Y Litovsky.   

Abstract

Electrical interaural time delay (ITD) discrimination was measured using 300-ms bursts applied to binaural pitch matched electrodes at basal, mid, and apical locations in each ear. Six bilateral implant users, who had previously shown good ITD sensitivity at a pulse rate of 100 pulses per second (pps), were assessed. Thresholds were measured as a function of pulse rate between 100 and 1,000 Hz, as well as modulation rate over that same range for high-rate pulse trains at 6,000 pps. Results were similar for all three places of stimulation and showed decreasing ITD sensitivity as either pulse rate or modulation rate increased, although the extent of that effect varied across subjects. The results support a model comprising a common ITD mechanism for high- and low-frequency places of stimulation, which, for electrical stimulation, is rate-limited in the same way across electrodes because peripheral temporal responses are largely place invariant. Overall, ITD sensitivity was somewhat better with unmodulated pulse trains than with high-rate pulse trains modulated at matched rates, although comparisons at individual rates showed that difference to be significant only at 300 Hz. Electrodes presenting with the lowest thresholds at 600 Hz were further assessed using bursts with a ramped onset of 10 ms. The slower rise time resulted in decreased performance in four of the listeners, but not in the two best performers, indicating that those two could use ongoing cues at 600 Hz. Performance at each place was also measured using single-pulse stimuli. Comparison of those data with the unmodulated 300-ms burst thresholds showed that on average, the addition of ongoing cues beyond the onset enhanced overall ITD sensitivity at 100 and 300 Hz, but not at 600 Hz. At 1,000 Hz, the added ongoing cues actually decreased performance. That result is attributed to the introduction of ambiguous cues within the physiologically relevant range and increased dichotic firing.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19513792      PMCID: PMC2774408          DOI: 10.1007/s10162-009-0175-x

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


  26 in total

1.  Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve. III. Response initiation sites and temporal fine structure.

Authors:  E Javel; R K Shepherd
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 3.208

2.  Speech perception, localization, and lateralization with bilateral cochlear implants.

Authors:  Richard J M van Hoesel; Richard S Tyler
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Correct tonotopic representation is necessary for complex pitch perception.

Authors:  Andrew J Oxenham; Joshua G W Bernstein; Hector Penagos
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2004-01-12       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 4.  Sound localization and delay lines--do mammals fit the model?

Authors:  David McAlpine; Benedikt Grothe
Journal:  Trends Neurosci       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 13.837

5.  Sound localization in bilateral users of MED-EL COMBI 40/40+ cochlear implants.

Authors:  P Nopp; P Schleich; P D'Haese
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 3.570

6.  Exploring the benefits of bilateral cochlear implants.

Authors:  Richard J M van Hoesel
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2004 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.854

7.  Temporal weighting in sound localization.

Authors:  G Christopher Stecker; Ervin R Hafter
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Models of brainstem responses to bilateral electrical stimulation.

Authors:  H Steven Colburn; Yoojin Chung; Yi Zhou; Andrew Brughera
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2008-10-22

9.  Detection of interaural differences of intensity in trains of high-frequency clicks as a function of interclick interval and number.

Authors:  E R Hafter; R H Dye; E Wenzel
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1983-05       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Predicting binaural gain in intelligibility and release from masking for speech.

Authors:  H Levitt; L R Rabiner
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1967-10       Impact factor: 1.840

View more
  53 in total

1.  Studies on bilateral cochlear implants at the University of Wisconsin's Binaural Hearing and Speech Laboratory.

Authors:  Ruth Y Litovsky; Matthew J Goupell; Shelly Godar; Tina Grieco-Calub; Gary L Jones; Soha N Garadat; Smita Agrawal; Alan Kan; Ann Todd; Christi Hess; Sara Misurelli
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 1.664

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.  Effect of multi-electrode configuration on sensitivity to interaural timing differences in bilateral cochlear-implant users.

Authors:  Alan Kan; Heath G Jones; Ruth Y Litovsky
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Review of recent work on spatial hearing skills in children with bilateral cochlear implants.

Authors:  Ruth Y Litovsky
Journal:  Cochlear Implants Int       Date:  2011-05

6.  Binaural masking level differences in actual and simulated bilateral cochlear implant listeners.

Authors:  Thomas Lu; Ruth Litovsky; Fan-Gang Zeng
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Cochlear implant patients' localization using interaural level differences exceeds that of untrained normal hearing listeners.

Authors:  Justin M Aronoff; Daniel J Freed; Laurel M Fisher; Ivan Pal; Sigfrid D Soli
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Effect of mismatched place-of-stimulation on binaural fusion and lateralization in bilateral cochlear-implant users.

Authors:  Alan Kan; Corey Stoelb; Ruth Y Litovsky; Matthew J Goupell
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  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

10.  Effect of age at onset of deafness on binaural sensitivity in electric hearing in humans.

Authors:  Ruth Y Litovsky; Gary L Jones; Smita Agrawal; Richard van Hoesel
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.