Literature DB >> 26087114

Morphological correlates of hearing loss after cochlear implantation and electro-acoustic stimulation in a hearing-impaired Guinea pig model.

Lina A J Reiss1, Gemaine Stark2, Anh T Nguyen-Huynh2, Kayce A Spear2, Hongzheng Zhang3, Chiemi Tanaka4, Hongzhe Li2.   

Abstract

Hybrid or electro-acoustic stimulation (EAS) cochlear implants (CIs) are designed to provide high-frequency electric hearing together with residual low-frequency acoustic hearing. However, 30-50% of EAS CI recipients lose residual hearing after implantation. The objective of this study was to determine the mechanisms of EAS-induced hearing loss in an animal model with high-frequency hearing loss. Guinea pigs were exposed to 24 h of noise (12-24 kHz at 116 dB) to induce a high-frequency hearing loss. After recovery, two groups of animals were implanted (n = 6 per group), with one group receiving chronic acoustic and electric stimulation for 10 weeks, and the other group receiving no stimulation during this time frame. A third group (n = 6) was not implanted, but received chronic acoustic stimulation. Auditory brainstem responses were recorded biweekly to monitor changes in hearing. The organ of Corti was immunolabeled with phalloidin, anti-CtBP2, and anti-GluR2 to quantify hair cells, ribbons and post-synaptic receptors. The lateral wall was immunolabeled with phalloidin and lectin to quantify stria vascularis capillary diameters. Bimodal or trimodal diameter distributions were observed; the number and location of peaks were objectively determined using the Aikake Information Criterion and Expectation Maximization algorithm. Noise exposure led to immediate hearing loss at 16-32 kHz for all groups. Cochlear implantation led to additional hearing loss at 4-8 kHz; this hearing loss was negatively and positively correlated with minimum and maximum peaks of the bimodal or trimodal distributions of stria vascularis capillary diameters, respectively. After chronic stimulation, no significant group changes in thresholds were seen; however, elevated thresholds at 1 kHz in implanted, stimulated animals were significantly correlated with decreased presynaptic ribbon and postsynaptic receptor counts. Inner and outer hair cell counts did not differ between groups and were not correlated with threshold shifts at any frequency. As in the previous study in a normal-hearing model, stria vascularis capillary changes were associated with immediate hearing loss after implantation, while little to no hair cell loss was observed even in cochlear regions with threshold shifts as large as 40-50 dB. These findings again support a role of lateral wall blood flow changes, rather than hair cell loss, in hearing loss after surgical trauma, and implicate the endocochlear potential as a factor in implantation-induced hearing loss. Further, the analysis of the hair cell ribbons and post-synaptic receptors suggest that delayed hearing loss may be linked to synapse or peripheral nerve loss due to stimulation excitotoxicity or inflammation. Further research is needed to separate these potential mechanisms of delayed hearing loss.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cochlear implant; Electro-acoustic stimulation; Hearing loss; Hybrid; Stria vascularis; Synapse

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26087114      PMCID: PMC4905574          DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2015.06.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hear Res        ISSN: 0378-5955            Impact factor:   3.208


  37 in total

1.  The benefits of combining acoustic and electric stimulation for the recognition of speech, voice and melodies.

Authors:  Michael F Dorman; Rene H Gifford; Anthony J Spahr; Sharon A McKarns
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2007-11-29       Impact factor: 1.854

2.  Functional role of neurotrophin-3 in synapse regeneration by spiral ganglion neurons on inner hair cells after excitotoxic trauma in vitro.

Authors:  Qiong Wang; Steven H Green
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2011-05-25       Impact factor: 6.167

3.  Primary neural degeneration in the Guinea pig cochlea after reversible noise-induced threshold shift.

Authors:  Harrison W Lin; Adam C Furman; Sharon G Kujawa; M Charles Liberman
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2011-06-18

4.  Round window electrocochleography just before cochlear implantation: relationship to word recognition outcomes in adults.

Authors:  Douglas C Fitzpatrick; Adam P Campbell; Adam T Campbell; Baishakhi Choudhury; Margaret T Dillon; Margaret P Dillon; Mathieu Forgues; Craig A Buchman; Oliver F Adunka
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 2.311

5.  Molecular mechanisms involved in cochlear implantation trauma and the protection of hearing and auditory sensory cells by inhibition of c-Jun-N-terminal kinase signaling.

Authors:  Adrien A Eshraghi; Chhavi Gupta; Thomas R Van De Water; Jorge E Bohorquez; Carolyn Garnham; Esperanza Bas; Victoria Maria Talamo
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2013-02-04       Impact factor: 3.325

6.  Endotoxemia-mediated inflammation potentiates aminoglycoside-induced ototoxicity.

Authors:  Ja-Won Koo; Lourdes Quintanilla-Dieck; Meiyan Jiang; Jianping Liu; Zachary D Urdang; Jordan J Allensworth; Campbell P Cross; Hongzhe Li; Peter S Steyger
Journal:  Sci Transl Med       Date:  2015-07-29       Impact factor: 17.956

7.  Hybrid 10 clinical trial: preliminary results.

Authors:  Bruce J Gantz; Marlan R Hansen; Christopher W Turner; Jacob J Oleson; Lina A Reiss; Aaron J Parkinson
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2009-04-22       Impact factor: 1.854

8.  Hearing preservation surgery for cochlear implantation--hearing and quality of life after 2 years.

Authors:  Peter L Santa Maria; Chloe Domville-Lewis; Catherine M Sucher; Ronel Chester-Browne; Marcus D Atlas
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 2.311

9.  Excitatory amino acid antagonists protect cochlear auditory neurons from excitotoxicity.

Authors:  J L Puel; R Pujol; F Tribillac; S Ladrech; M Eybalin
Journal:  J Comp Neurol       Date:  1994-03-08       Impact factor: 3.215

10.  Acoustic trauma increases cochlear and hair cell uptake of gentamicin.

Authors:  Hongzhe Li; Qi Wang; Peter S Steyger
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-04-28       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  15 in total

1.  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

2.  Effects of Combined Gentamicin and Furosemide Treatment on Cochlear Macrophages.

Authors:  Liana Sargsyan; Austin R Swisher; Alisa P Hetrick; Hongzhe Li
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2022-07-01       Impact factor: 6.208

3.  Molecular aetiology of ski-slope hearing loss and audiological course of cochlear implantees.

Authors:  Yehree Kim; Jin Hee Han; Hyo Soon Yoo; Byung Yoon Choi
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2022-02-25       Impact factor: 3.236

4.  Access and Polarization Electrode Impedance Changes in Electric-Acoustic Stimulation Cochlear Implant Users with Delayed Loss of Acoustic Hearing.

Authors:  Viral D Tejani; Hyejin Yang; Jeong-Seo Kim; Helin Hernandez; Jacob J Oleson; Marlan R Hansen; Bruce J Gantz; Paul J Abbas; Carolyn J Brown
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2021-10-22

5.  The development of neural stimulators: a review of preclinical safety and efficacy studies.

Authors:  Robert K Shepherd; Joel Villalobos; Owen Burns; David A X Nayagam
Journal:  J Neural Eng       Date:  2018-05-14       Impact factor: 5.379

6.  Delayed changes in auditory status in cochlear implant users with preserved acoustic hearing.

Authors:  Rachel A Scheperle; Viral D Tejani; Julia K Omtvedt; Carolyn J Brown; Paul J Abbas; Marlan R Hansen; Bruce J Gantz; Jacob J Oleson; Marie V Ozanne
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2017-04-12       Impact factor: 3.208

7.  A Preliminary Investigation of the Air-Bone Gap: Changes in Intracochlear Sound Pressure With Air- and Bone-conducted Stimuli After Cochlear Implantation.

Authors:  Renee M Banakis Hartl; Jameson K Mattingly; Nathaniel T Greene; Herman A Jenkins; Stephen P Cass; Daniel J Tollin
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 2.311

8.  A physiological and behavioral system for hearing restoration with cochlear implants.

Authors:  Julia King; Ina Shehu; J Thomas Roland; Mario A Svirsky; Robert C Froemke
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2016-06-08       Impact factor: 2.714

9.  Residual Hair Cell Responses in Electric-Acoustic Stimulation Cochlear Implant Users with Complete Loss of Acoustic Hearing After Implantation.

Authors:  Viral D Tejani; Jeong-Seo Kim; Jacob J Oleson; Paul J Abbas; Carolyn J Brown; Marlan R Hansen; Bruce J Gantz
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2021-02-04

10.  Direct Intracochlear Acoustic Stimulation Using a PZT Microactuator.

Authors:  Chuan Luo; Irina Omelchenko; Robert Manson; Carol Robbins; Elizabeth C Oesterle; Guo Zhong Cao; I Y Shen; Clifford R Hume
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2015-12-01       Impact factor: 3.293

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.