Literature DB >> 21178633

Identifying cochlear implant channels with poor electrode-neuron interfaces: electrically evoked auditory brain stem responses measured with the partial tripolar configuration.

Julie Arenberg Bierer1, Kathleen F Faulkner, Kelly L Tremblay.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to compare cochlear implant behavioral measures and electrically evoked auditory brain stem responses (EABRs) obtained with a spatially focused electrode configuration. It has been shown previously that channels with high thresholds, when measured with the tripolar configuration, exhibit relatively broad psychophysical tuning curves. The elevated threshold and degraded spatial/spectral selectivity of such channels are consistent with a poor electrode-neuron interface, defined as suboptimal electrode placement or reduced nerve survival. However, the psychophysical methods required to obtain these data are time intensive and may not be practical during a clinical mapping session, especially for young children. Here, we have extended the previous investigation to determine whether a physiological approach could provide a similar assessment of channel functionality. We hypothesized that, in accordance with the perceptual measures, higher EABR thresholds would correlate with steeper EABR amplitude growth functions, reflecting a degraded electrode-neuron interface.
DESIGN: Data were collected from six cochlear implant listeners implanted with the HiRes 90k cochlear implant (Advanced Bionics). Single-channel thresholds and most comfortable listening levels were obtained for stimuli that varied in presumed electrical field size by using the partial tripolar configuration, for which a fraction of current (σ) from a center active electrode returns through two neighboring electrodes and the remainder through a distant indifferent electrode. EABRs were obtained in each subject for the two channels having the highest and lowest tripolar (σ = 1 or 0.9) behavioral threshold. Evoked potentials were measured with both the monopolar (σ = 0) and a more focused partial tripolar (σ ≥ 0.50) configuration.
RESULTS: Consistent with previous studies, EABR thresholds were highly and positively correlated with behavioral thresholds obtained with both the monopolar and partial tripolar configurations. The Wave V amplitude growth functions with increasing stimulus level showed the predicted effect of shallower growth for the partial tripolar than for the monopolar configuration, but this was observed only for the low-threshold channels. In contrast, high-threshold channels showed the opposite effect; steeper growth functions were seen for the partial tripolar configuration.
CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that behavioral thresholds or EABRs measured with a restricted stimulus can be used to identify potentially impaired cochlear implant channels. Channels having high thresholds and steep growth functions would likely not activate the appropriate spatially restricted region of the cochlea, leading to suboptimal perception. As a clinical tool, quick identification of impaired channels could lead to patient-specific mapping strategies and result in improved speech and music perception.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21178633      PMCID: PMC3082606          DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3181ff33ab

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


  35 in total

1.  Electrically evoked auditory brainstem response: growth of response with current level.

Authors:  P J Abbas; C J Brown
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1991-01       Impact factor: 3.208

2.  Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics.

Authors:  H Levitt
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1971-02       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve: the effect of electrode position on neural excitation.

Authors:  R K Shepherd; S Hatsushika; G M Clark
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1993-03       Impact factor: 3.208

4.  Multivariate predictors of audiological success with multichannel cochlear implants.

Authors:  B J Gantz; G G Woodworth; J F Knutson; P J Abbas; R S Tyler
Journal:  Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 1.547

5.  The use of long-duration current pulses to assess nerve survival.

Authors:  C A Miller; P J Abbas; B K Robinson
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1994-07       Impact factor: 3.208

6.  Differential electrical excitation of the auditory nerve.

Authors:  R C Black; G M Clark
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1980-03       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Effect of site of stimulation on the guinea pig's electrically evoked brain stem response.

Authors:  R R Marsh; H Yamane; W P Potsic
Journal:  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  1981 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.497

8.  Estimating eighth nerve survival by electrical stimulation.

Authors:  L Smith; F B Simmons
Journal:  Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol       Date:  1983 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.547

9.  Estimation of surviving spiral ganglion cells in the deaf rat using the electrically evoked auditory brainstem response.

Authors:  R D Hall
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1990-04       Impact factor: 3.208

10.  HiResolution and conventional sound processing in the HiResolution bionic ear: using appropriate outcome measures to assess speech recognition ability.

Authors:  Dawn Burton Koch; Mary Joe Osberger; Phil Segel; Dorcas Kessler
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2004 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.854

View more
  23 in total

1.  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

2.  Spatial channel interactions in cochlear implants.

Authors:  Qing Tang; Raul Benítez; Fan-Gang Zeng
Journal:  J Neural Eng       Date:  2011-07-13       Impact factor: 5.379

3.  Spectral and temporal analysis of simulated dead regions in cochlear implants.

Authors:  Jong Ho Won; Gary L Jones; Il Joon Moon; Jay T Rubinstein
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2015-03-05

4.  Low-frequency fine-structure cues allow for the online use of lexical stress during spoken-word recognition in spectrally degraded speech.

Authors:  Ying-Yee Kong; Alexandra Jesse
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Sensitivity to pulse phase duration in cochlear implant listeners: effects of stimulation mode.

Authors:  Monita Chatterjee; Aditya M Kulkarni
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  The role of continuous low-frequency harmonicity cues for interrupted speech perception in bimodal hearing.

Authors:  Soo Hee Oh; Gail S Donaldson; Ying-Yee Kong
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Assessing the Electrode-Neuron Interface with the Electrically Evoked Compound Action Potential, Electrode Position, and Behavioral Thresholds.

Authors:  Lindsay DeVries; Rachel Scheperle; Julie Arenberg Bierer
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2016-02-29

8.  Relationships Among Peripheral and Central Electrophysiological Measures of Spatial and Spectral Selectivity and Speech Perception in Cochlear Implant Users.

Authors:  Rachel A Scheperle; Paul J Abbas
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2015 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.570

9.  Comparisons between detection threshold and loudness perception for individual cochlear implant channels.

Authors:  Julie Arenberg Bierer; Amberly D Nye
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2014 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.570

10.  Simulated auditory fiber myelination heterogeneity desynchronizes population responses to electrical stimulation limiting inter-aural timing difference representation.

Authors:  Jesse M Resnick; Jay T Rubinstein
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2021-02       Impact factor: 1.840

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.