| Literature DB >> 30197426 |
G Cartocci1,2, A G Maglione3,2, G Vecchiato1, E Modica4, D Rossi4, P Malerba5, P Marsella6, A Scorpecci6, S Giannantonio6, F Mosca7, C A Leone7, R Grassia7, F Babiloni1,3.
Abstract
How is music perceived by cochlear implant (CI) users? This question arises as "the next step" given the impressive performance obtained by these patients in language perception. Furthermore, how can music perception be evaluated beyond self-report rating, in order to obtain measurable data? To address this question, estimation of the frontal electroencephalographic (EEG) alpha activity imbalance, acquired through a 19-channel EEG cap, appears to be a suitable instrument to measure the approach/withdrawal (AW index) reaction to external stimuli. Specifically, a greater value of AW indicates an increased propensity to stimulus approach, and vice versa a lower one a tendency to withdraw from the stimulus. Additionally, due to prelingually and postlingually deafened pathology acquisition, children and adults, respectively, would probably differ in music perception. The aim of the present study was to investigate children and adult CI users, in unilateral (UCI) and bilateral (BCI) implantation conditions, during three experimental situations of music exposure (normal, distorted and mute). Additionally, a study of functional connectivity patterns within cerebral networks was performed to investigate functioning patterns in different experimental populations. As a general result, congruency among patterns between BCI patients and control (CTRL) subjects was seen, characterised by lowest values for the distorted condition (vs. normal and mute conditions) in the AW index and in the connectivity analysis. Additionally, the normal and distorted conditions were significantly different in CI and CTRL adults, and in CTRL children, but not in CI children. These results suggest a higher capacity of discrimination and approach motivation towards normal music in CTRL and BCI subjects, but not for UCI patients. Therefore, for perception of music CTRL and BCI participants appear more similar than UCI subjects, as estimated by measurable and not self-reported parameters.Entities:
Keywords: Alpha rhythm; Approach/Withdrawal; Electroencephalography; Functional connectivity; Graph Theory; Music
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30197426 PMCID: PMC6146571 DOI: 10.14639/0392-100X-1407
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital ISSN: 0392-100X Impact factor: 2.124
Paediatric groups age and time of cochlear implant experience.
| Group | Age at EEG recording (mean years±SD) | Amplification experience 1st CI (mean years±SD) | Amplification experience 2nd CI (mean years±SD) |
|---|---|---|---|
| CTRL | 7.67 ± 4.5 | ||
| UCI | 4.9 ± 2.15 | 1.73 ± 0.85 | |
| BCI | 5.42 ± 1.92 | 2.73 ± 1.12 | 0.31 ± 0.16 |
Paediatric clinical data.
| Participant | Gender | Atiology | Age at 1st CI | Side 1st CI | Age at 2nd CI | Side 2nd CI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | M | Unknown | 1.92 | R | ||
| 2 | F | Unknown | 7.58 | R | ||
| 3 | F | Unknown | 4.17 | L | 7.25 | R |
| 4 | F | Unknown | 1.42 | R | 4.33 | L |
| 5 | F | Unknown | 1.75 | R | ||
| 6 | F | Unknown | 2.17 | R | 2.92 | L |
| 7 | M | Prematurity | 2.67 | R | 5.58 | L |
Adult groups age and time of cochlear implant experience.
| Group | Age at EEG recording (mean years±SD) | Amplification experience 1st CI (mean years±SD) | Amplification experience 2nd CI (mean years±SD) |
|---|---|---|---|
| CTRL | 37.57 ± 14.55 | ||
| UCI | 48.87 ± 14.74 | 2.89 ± 3.51 | |
| BCI | 49.71 ± 15.82 | 3.87 ± 3.55 | 0.65 ± 0.35 |
Adult clinical data (PTA calculated as the average threshold among 250 Hz, 500 Hz, 1 KHz, 2 KHz frequencies for each ear).
| Participant | Gender | Deafness | Age at 1st CI (mo) | PTA Pre-1st CI Right side | PTA Pre-1st CI Left side | Side of 1st CI | Age at 2nd CI (mo) | PTA Pre-2nd CI Right side | PTA Pre-2nd CI Left side | Side of 2nd CI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | M | Postverbal | 61.08 | 62.5 | 95 | R | 61.33 | 88.75 | 95 | L |
| 2 | F | Periverbal | 52.08 | 95 | 95 | L | 54.33 | 95 | 108.33 | R |
| 3 | M | Postverbal | 32.67 | 81.67 | 120 | R | 34.58 | 100 | 120 | L |
| 4 | M | Postverbal | 47.08 | 57.5 | 91.25 | L | 57.5 | 103.75 | ||
| 5 | F | Periverbal | 20.58 | 95 | 95 | R | 25.42 | 120 | 102.5 | L |
| 6 | M | Periverbal | 41.00 | 101.25 | 87.5 | R | 50.50 | 115 | 97.5 | L |
| 7 | M | Postverbal | 67.33 | 80 | 120 | L | 68.08 | 120 | 120 | R |
Fig. 2.EEG alpha asymmetries reported in the paediatric (left panels) and adult groups (right panels). Asterisks indicate statistically significant differences. Control = normal hearing control subjects; UCI = unilateral cochlear implant subjects; BCI = bilateral cochlear implant subjects.
Fig. 4.EEG imbalance of local efficiency graph index reported in the paediatric (left panels) and adult groups (right panels). Asterisks indicate statistically significant differences. Control = normal hearing control subjects; UCI = unilateral cochlear implant subjects; BCI = bilateral cochlear implant subjects.
Fig. 3.EEG imbalance of out degree graph index reported in the paediatric (left panels) and adult groups (right panels). Asterisks indicate statistically significant differences. Control = normal hearing control subjects; UCI = unilateral cochlear implant subjects; BCI = bilateral cochlear implant subjects.