Literature DB >> 21877801

Ipsilateral masking between acoustic and electric stimulations.

Payton Lin1, Christopher W Turner, Bruce J Gantz, Hamid R Djalilian, Fan-Gang Zeng.   

Abstract

Residual acoustic hearing can be preserved in the same ear following cochlear implantation with minimally traumatic surgical techniques and short-electrode arrays. The combined electric-acoustic stimulation significantly improves cochlear implant performance, particularly speech recognition in noise. The present study measures simultaneous masking by electric pulses on acoustic pure tones, or vice versa, to investigate electric-acoustic interactions and their underlying psychophysical mechanisms. Six subjects, with acoustic hearing preserved at low frequencies in their implanted ear, participated in the study. One subject had a fully inserted 24 mm Nucleus Freedom array and five subjects had Iowa/Nucleus hybrid implants that were only 10 mm in length. Electric masking data of the long-electrode subject showed that stimulation from the most apical electrodes produced threshold elevations over 10 dB for 500, 625, and 750 Hz probe tones, but no elevation for 125 and 250 Hz tones. On the contrary, electric stimulation did not produce any electric masking in the short-electrode subjects. In the acoustic masking experiment, 125-750 Hz pure tones were used to acoustically mask electric stimulation. The acoustic masking results showed that, independent of pure tone frequency, both long- and short-electrode subjects showed threshold elevations at apical and basal electrodes. The present results can be interpreted in terms of underlying physiological mechanisms related to either place-dependent peripheral masking or place-independent central masking.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21877801      PMCID: PMC3190656          DOI: 10.1121/1.3605294

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am        ISSN: 0001-4966            Impact factor:   1.840


  22 in total

1.  Contralateral masking in cochlear implant users with residual hearing in the non-implanted ear.

Authors:  C James; P Blamey; J K Shallop; P V Incerti; A M Nicholas
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2001 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.854

2.  Temporal masking in electric hearing.

Authors:  Fan-Gang Zeng; Hongbin Chen; Shilong Han
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2005-12

3.  Preservation of hearing in cochlear implant surgery: advantages of combined electrical and acoustical speech processing.

Authors:  Bruce J Gantz; Christopher Turner; Kate E Gfeller; Mary W Lowder
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 3.325

4.  Speech and melody recognition in binaurally combined acoustic and electric hearing.

Authors:  Ying-Yee Kong; Ginger S Stickney; Fan-Gang Zeng
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Music perception with cochlear implants and residual hearing.

Authors:  Kate E Gfeller; Carol Olszewski; Christopher Turner; Bruce Gantz; Jacob Oleson
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2006-10-06       Impact factor: 1.854

6.  Pseudospontaneous activity: stochastic independence of auditory nerve fibers with electrical stimulation.

Authors:  J T Rubinstein; B S Wilson; C C Finley; P J Abbas
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 3.208

7.  Psychophysical studies with two binaural cochlear implant subjects.

Authors:  R J van Hoesel; G M Clark
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1997-07       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Electric-acoustic stimulation of the auditory system. New technology for severe hearing loss.

Authors:  C von Ilberg; J Kiefer; J Tillein; T Pfenningdorff; R Hartmann; E Stürzebecher; R Klinke
Journal:  ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec       Date:  1999 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.538

9.  Auditory function and speech understanding in listeners who qualify for EAS surgery.

Authors:  René H Gifford; Michael F Dorman; Anthony J Spahr; Sid P Bacon
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 3.570

10.  Electrically evoked compound action potentials of guinea pig and cat: responses to monopolar, monophasic stimulation.

Authors:  C A Miller; P J Abbas; J T Rubinstein; B K Robinson; A J Matsuoka; G Woodworth
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 3.208

View more
  13 in total

1.  Target structures for cochlear infrared neural stimulation.

Authors:  Hunter K Young; Xiaodong Tan; Nan Xia; Claus-Peter Richter
Journal:  Neurophotonics       Date:  2015-05-18       Impact factor: 3.593

2.  Using Neural Response Telemetry to Monitor Physiological Responses to Acoustic Stimulation in Hybrid Cochlear Implant Users.

Authors:  Paul J Abbas; Viral D Tejani; Rachel A Scheperle; Carolyn J Brown
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2017 Jul/Aug       Impact factor: 3.570

3.  Central masking with bilateral cochlear implants.

Authors:  Payton Lin; Thomas Lu; Fan-Gang Zeng
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Forward Electric Stimulation-Induced Interference in Intracochlear Electrocochleography of Acoustic Stimulation in the Cochlea of Guinea Pigs.

Authors:  Shiyao Min; Tianhao Lu; Min Chen; Jiabao Mao; Xuerui Hu; Shufeng Li
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2022-06-06       Impact factor: 5.152

5.  Effect of Place-Based Versus Default Mapping Procedures on Masked Speech Recognition: Simulations of Cochlear Implant Alone and Electric-Acoustic Stimulation.

Authors:  Margaret T Dillon; Brendan P O'Connell; Michael W Canfarotta; Emily Buss; Joseph Hopfinger
Journal:  Am J Audiol       Date:  2022-04-08       Impact factor: 1.636

6.  The benefits of bimodal hearing: effect of frequency region and acoustic bandwidth.

Authors:  Sterling W Sheffield; René H Gifford
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2014-02-15       Impact factor: 1.854

7.  Effectiveness of Place-based Mapping in Electric-Acoustic Stimulation Devices.

Authors:  Margaret T Dillon; Michael W Canfarotta; Emily Buss; Joseph Hopfinger; Brendan P O'Connell
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2021-01       Impact factor: 2.311

8.  Binaural electric-acoustic interactions recorded from the inferior colliculus of Guinea pigs: the effect of masking observed in the central nucleus of the inferior colliculus.

Authors:  Heil Noh; Dong-Hee Lee
Journal:  Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2012-08-27       Impact factor: 3.372

9.  Comparison of Speech Recognition With an Organ of Corti Versus Spiral Ganglion Frequency-to-Place Function in Place-Based Mapping of Cochlear Implant and Electric-Acoustic Stimulation Devices.

Authors:  Margaret T Dillon; Michael W Canfarotta; Emily Buss; Brendan P O'Connell
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 2.619

10.  Reduced acoustic and electric integration in concurrent-vowel recognition.

Authors:  Hsin-I Yang; Fan-Gang Zeng
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.