Literature DB >> 25678235

Effects of electrode array length on frequency-place mismatch and speech perception with cochlear implants.

Frederic Venail1, Caroline Mathiolon, Sophie Menjot de Champfleur, Jean Pierre Piron, Marielle Sicard, Françoise Villemus, Marie Aude Vessigaud, Françoise Sterkers-Artieres, Michel Mondain, Alain Uziel.   

Abstract

Frequency-place mismatch often occurs after cochlear implantation, yet its effect on speech perception outcome remains unclear. In this article, we propose a method, based on cochlea imaging, to determine the cochlear place-frequency map. We evaluated the effect of frequency-place mismatch on speech perception outcome in subjects implanted with 3 different lengths of electrode arrays. A deeper insertion was responsible for a larger frequency-place mismatch and a decreased and delayed speech perception improvement by comparison with a shallower insertion, for which a similar but slighter effect was noticed. Our results support the notion that selecting an electrode array length adapted to each individual's cochlear anatomy may reduce frequency-place mismatch and thus improve speech perception outcome.
© 2015 S. Karger AG, Basel

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25678235     DOI: 10.1159/000369333

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


  9 in total

1.  Variability of the mental representation of the cochlear anatomy during cochlear implantation.

Authors:  Renato Torres; Guillaume Kazmitcheff; Daniele Bernardeschi; Daniele De Seta; Jean Loup Bensimon; Evelyne Ferrary; Olivier Sterkers; Yann Nguyen
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2015-09-01       Impact factor: 2.503

2.  Polarity Sensitivity as a Potential Correlate of Neural Degeneration in Cochlear Implant Users.

Authors:  Quentin Mesnildrey; Frédéric Venail; Robert P Carlyon; Olivier Macherey
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2020-02-04

3.  The smaller the frequency-to-place mismatch the better the hearing outcomes in cochlear implant recipients?

Authors:  Griet Mertens; Paul Van de Heyning; Olivier Vanderveken; Vedat Topsakal; Vincent Van Rompaey
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2021-06-15       Impact factor: 2.503

4.  An automated A-value measurement tool for accurate cochlear duct length estimation.

Authors:  John E Iyaniwura; Mai Elfarnawany; Hanif M Ladak; Sumit K Agrawal
Journal:  J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2018-01-22

Review 5.  Measuring Cochlear Duct Length - a historical analysis of methods and results.

Authors:  Robert W Koch; Hanif M Ladak; Mai Elfarnawany; Sumit K Agrawal
Journal:  J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2017-03-07

Review 6.  Challenging aspects of contemporary cochlear implant electrode array design.

Authors:  Pavel Mistrík; Claude Jolly; Daniel Sieber; Ingeborg Hochmair
Journal:  World J Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2018-03-30

7.  Benefits to Speech Perception in Noise From the Binaural Integration of Electric and Acoustic Signals in Simulated Unilateral Deafness.

Authors:  Ning Ma; Saffron Morris; Pádraig Thomas Kitterick
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2016 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

8.  Listening to speech with a guinea pig-to-human brain-to-brain interface.

Authors:  Claus-Peter Richter; Petrina La Faire; Xiaodong Tan; Pamela Fiebig; David M Landsberger; Alan G Micco
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-06-10       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Polarity Sensitivity of Human Auditory Nerve Fibers Based on Pulse Shape, Cochlear Implant Stimulation Strategy and Array.

Authors:  Amirreza Heshmat; Sogand Sajedi; Anneliese Schrott-Fischer; Frank Rattay
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2021-12-08       Impact factor: 4.677

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.