Literature DB >> 23881208

Using temporal modulation sensitivity to select stimulation sites for processor MAPs in cochlear implant listeners.

Soha N Garadat1, Teresa A Zwolan, Bryan E Pfingst.   

Abstract

Previous studies in our laboratory showed that temporal acuity as assessed by modulation detection thresholds (MDTs) varied across activation sites and that this site-to-site variability was subject specific. Using two 10-channel MAPs, the previous experiments showed that processor MAPs that had better across-site mean (ASM) MDTs yielded better speech recognition than MAPs with poorer ASM MDTs tested in the same subject. The current study extends our earlier work on developing more optimal-fitting strategies to test the feasibility of using a site-selection approach in the clinical domain. This study examined the hypothesis that revising the clinical speech processor MAP for cochlear implant (CI) recipients by turning off selected sites that have poorer temporal acuity and reallocating frequencies to the remaining electrodes would lead to improved speech recognition. Twelve CI recipients participated in the experiments. We found that site selection procedure based on MDTs in the presence of a masker resulted in improved performance on consonant recognition and recognition of sentences in noise. In contrast, vowel recognition was poorer with the experimental MAP than with the clinical MAP, possibly due to reduced spectral resolution when sites were removed from the experimental MAP. Overall, these results suggest a promising path for improving recipient outcomes using personalized processor-fitting strategies based on a psychophysical measure of temporal acuity.
© 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23881208      PMCID: PMC3874548          DOI: 10.1159/000351302

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


  52 in total

1.  Threshold and channel interaction in cochlear implant users: evaluation of the tripolar electrode configuration.

Authors:  Julie Arenberg Bierer
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Spectral and temporal cues in cochlear implant speech perception.

Authors:  Kaibao Nie; Amy Barco; Fan-Gang Zeng
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 3.570

3.  Forward-masked spatial tuning curves in cochlear implant users.

Authors:  David A Nelson; Gail S Donaldson; Heather Kreft
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Across-site patterns of modulation detection in listeners with cochlear implants.

Authors:  Bryan E Pfingst; Rose A Burkholder-Juhasz; Li Xu; Catherine S Thompson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Multivariate predictors of music perception and appraisal by adult cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Kate Gfeller; Jacob Oleson; John F Knutson; Patrick Breheny; Virginia Driscoll; Carol Olszewski
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 1.664

6.  Multichannel cochlear implants: relation of histopathology to performance.

Authors:  Jose N Fayad; Fred H Linthicum
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 3.325

7.  Open set speech perception with auditory brainstem implant?

Authors:  Vittorio Colletti; Robert V Shannon
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 3.325

8.  Speech recognition and temporal amplitude modulation processing by Mandarin-speaking cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Xin Luo; Qian-Jie Fu; Chao-Gang Wei; Ke-Li Cao
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 3.570

9.  Cochlear implants: a remarkable past and a brilliant future.

Authors:  Blake S Wilson; Michael F Dorman
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2008-06-22       Impact factor: 3.208

10.  Histopathologic assessment of fibrosis and new bone formation in implanted human temporal bones using 3D reconstruction.

Authors:  Jose N Fayad; Andres O Makarem; Fred H Linthicum
Journal:  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 3.497

View more
  37 in total

1.  Deactivating cochlear implant electrodes to improve speech perception: A computational approach.

Authors:  Elad Sagi; Mario A Svirsky
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2018-10-19       Impact factor: 3.208

Review 2.  Importance of cochlear health for implant function.

Authors:  Bryan E Pfingst; Ning Zhou; Deborah J Colesa; Melissa M Watts; Stefan B Strahl; Soha N Garadat; Kara C Schvartz-Leyzac; Cameron L Budenz; Yehoash Raphael; Teresa A Zwolan
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2014-09-28       Impact factor: 3.208

3.  How electrically evoked compound action potentials in chronically implanted guinea pigs relate to auditory nerve health and electrode impedance.

Authors:  Kara C Schvartz-Leyzac; Deborah J Colesa; Christopher J Buswinka; Andrew M Rabah; Donald L Swiderski; Yehoash Raphael; Bryan E Pfingst
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2020-12       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Deactivating stimulation sites based on low-rate thresholds improves spectral ripple and speech reception thresholds in cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Ning Zhou
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Band importance functions of listeners with cochlear implants using clinical maps.

Authors:  Adam K Bosen; Monita Chatterjee
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Integration of Pulse Trains in Humans and Guinea Pigs with Cochlear Implants.

Authors:  Ning Zhou; Casey T Kraft; Deborah J Colesa; Bryan E Pfingst
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2015-05-20

7.  Asymmetric temporal envelope encoding: Implications for within- and across-ear envelope comparison.

Authors:  Sean R Anderson; Alan Kan; Ruth Y Litovsky
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Temporal Modulation Detection Depends on Sharpness of Spatial Tuning.

Authors:  Ning Zhou; Matthew Cadmus; Lixue Dong; Juliana Mathews
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2018-04-25

9.  Changes over time in the electrically evoked compound action potential (ECAP) interphase gap (IPG) effect following cochlear implantation in Guinea pigs.

Authors:  Kara C Schvartz-Leyzac; Deborah J Colesa; Christopher J Buswinka; Donald L Swiderski; Yehoash Raphael; Bryan E Pfingst
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2019-10-04       Impact factor: 3.208

10.  Across-site patterns of electrically evoked compound action potential amplitude-growth functions in multichannel cochlear implant recipients and the effects of the interphase gap.

Authors:  Kara C Schvartz-Leyzac; Bryan E Pfingst
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2016-08-10       Impact factor: 3.208

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.