Literature DB >> 27082667

Exploring the Source of Neural Responses of Different Latencies Obtained from Different Recording Electrodes in Cochlear Implant Users.

Akinori Kashio1, Viral D Tejani, Rachel A Scheperle, Carolyn J Brown, Paul J Abbas.   

Abstract

In this study we measured the electrically evoked compound action potential (ECAP) from different recording electrodes in the cochlea. Under the assumption that different response latencies may be the result of differences in the neural population contributing to the response, we assessed the relationship between neural response latency and spread of excitation. First, we evaluated changes in N1 latency when the recording electrode site was varied. Second, we recorded channel interaction functions using a forward masking technique but with recording electrodes at different intracochlear locations. For most individuals, N1 latency was similar across recording electrodes. However, reduced N1 latencies were observed in 21% of cochlear implant users when ECAPs were recorded using a remote recording electrode. We hypothesized that if recordings from different electrodes represented contributions from different populations of neurons, then one might expect that channel interaction functions would be different. However, we did not observe consistent differences in channel interaction functions (neither peak location nor breadth of the functions), and further, any variation in channel interaction functions was not correlated with ECAP latency. These results suggest that ECAPs from different recording electrodes with different latencies originate from similar neural populations.
© 2016 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27082667      PMCID: PMC4949124          DOI: 10.1159/000444739

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


  25 in total

1.  Speech recognition by normal-hearing and cochlear implant listeners as a function of intensity resolution.

Authors:  P C Loizou; M Dorman; O Poroy; T Spahr
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Three-dimensional spiraling finite element model of the electrically stimulated cochlea.

Authors:  T Hanekom
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 3.570

3.  Electrode configuration influences action potential initiation site and ensemble stochastic response properties.

Authors:  Charles A Miller; Paul J Abbas; Kirill V Nourski; Ning Hu; Barbara K Robinson
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 3.208

4.  Channel interaction in cochlear implant users evaluated using the electrically evoked compound action potential.

Authors:  Paul J Abbas; Michelle L Hughes; Carolyn J Brown; Charles A Miller; Heather South
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2004 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.854

5.  Spatial spread of neural excitation: comparison of compound action potential and forward-masking data in cochlear implant recipients.

Authors:  Lawrence T Cohen; Elaine Saunders; Louise M Richardson
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 2.117

6.  Effects of parameter manipulations on spread of excitation measured with electrically-evoked compound action potentials.

Authors:  Feddo B van der Beek; Jeroen J Briaire; Johan H M Frijns
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2012-02-08       Impact factor: 2.117

7.  The consequences of neural degeneration regarding optimal cochlear implant position in scala tympani: a model approach.

Authors:  Jeroen J Briaire; Johan H M Frijns
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2006-03-07       Impact factor: 3.208

8.  Investigation of the effects of temporal and spatial interactions on speech-recognition skills in cochlear-implant subjects.

Authors:  C S Throckmorton; L M Collins
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Forward masked excitation patterns in multielectrode electrical stimulation.

Authors:  M Chatterjee; R V Shannon
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Multistage Nonlinear Optimization to Recover Neural Activation Patterns From Evoked Compound Action Potentials of Cochlear Implant Users.

Authors:  Stefano Cosentino; Etienne Gaudrain; John M Deeks; Robert P Carlyon
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2015-09-03       Impact factor: 4.538

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  The Electrically Evoked Compound Action Potential: From Laboratory to Clinic.

Authors:  Shuman He; Holly F B Teagle; Craig A Buchman
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2017-06-23       Impact factor: 4.677

2.  Neural Tissue Degeneration in Rosenthal's Canal and Its Impact on Electrical Stimulation of the Auditory Nerve by Cochlear Implants: An Image-Based Modeling Study.

Authors:  Kiran Kumar Sriperumbudur; Revathi Appali; Anthony W Gummer; Ursula van Rienen
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2020-11-12       Impact factor: 5.923

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.