Literature DB >> 34999595

Neural Adaptation of the Electrically Stimulated Auditory Nerve Is Not Affected by Advanced Age in Postlingually Deafened, Middle-aged, and Elderly Adult Cochlear Implant Users.

Shuman He1,2, Jeffrey Skidmore1, Sara Conroy3, William J Riggs1,2, Brittney L Carter1, Ruili Xie1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the associations between advanced age and the amount and the speed of neural adaptation of the electrically stimulated auditory nerve (AN) in postlingually deafened adult cochlear implant (CI) users.
DESIGN: Study participants included 26 postlingually deafened adult CI users, ranging in age between 28.7 and 84.0 years (mean: 63.8 years, SD: 14.4 years) at the time of testing. All study participants used a Cochlear Nucleus device with a full electrode array insertion in the test ear. The stimulus was a 100-ms pulse train with a pulse rate of 500, 900, 1800, or 2400 pulses per second (pps) per channel. The stimulus was presented at the maximum comfortable level measured at 2400 pps with a presentation rate of 2 Hz. Neural adaptation of the AN was evaluated using electrophysiological measures of the electrically evoked compound action potential (eCAP). The amount of neural adaptation was quantified by the adaptation index (AI) within three time windows: around 0 to 8 ms (window 1), 44 to 50 ms (window 2), and 94 to 100 ms (window 3). The speed of neural adaptation was quantified using a two-parameter power law estimation. In 23 participants, four electrodes across the electrode array were tested. In three participants, three electrodes were tested. Results measured at different electrode locations were averaged for each participant at each pulse rate to get an overall representation of neural adaptation properties of the AN across the cochlea. Linear-mixed models (LMMs) were used (1) to evaluate the effects of age at testing and pulse rate on the speed of neural adaptation and (2) to assess the effects of age at testing, pulse rate, and duration of stimulation (i.e., time window) on the amount of neural adaptation in these participants.
RESULTS: There was substantial variability in both the amount and the speed of neural adaptation of the AN among study participants. The amount and the speed of neural adaptation increased at higher pulse rates. In addition, larger amounts of adaptation were observed for longer durations of stimulation. There was no significant effect of age on the speed or the amount of neural adaptation.
CONCLUSIONS: The amount and the speed of neural adaptation of the AN are affected by both the pulse rate and the duration of stimulation, with higher pulse rates and longer durations of stimulation leading to faster and greater neural adaptation. Advanced age does not affect neural adaptation of the AN in postlingually deafened, middle-aged and elderly adult CI users.
Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 34999595      PMCID: PMC9232840          DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000001184

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ear Hear        ISSN: 0196-0202            Impact factor:   3.562


  84 in total

1.  Residual speech recognition and cochlear implant performance: effects of implantation criteria.

Authors:  J T Rubinstein; W S Parkinson; R S Tyler; B J Gantz
Journal:  Am J Otol       Date:  1999-07

2.  Electrically evoked whole-nerve action potentials: data from human cochlear implant users.

Authors:  C J Brown; P J Abbas; B Gantz
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1990-09       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Age-related loss of activity of auditory-nerve fibers.

Authors:  R A Schmiedt; J H Mills; F A Boettcher
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 2.714

4.  Amplitude Modulation Detection and Speech Recognition in Late-Implanted Prelingually and Postlingually Deafened Cochlear Implant Users.

Authors:  Anke M De Ruiter; Joke A Debruyne; Michelene N Chenault; Tom Francart; Jan P L Brokx
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2015 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.570

5.  Forward Masking in Cochlear Implant Users: Electrophysiological and Psychophysical Data Using Pulse Train Maskers.

Authors:  Youssef Adel; Gaston Hilkhuysen; Arnaud Noreña; Yves Cazals; Stéphane Roman; Olivier Macherey
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2017-02-21

6.  Influence of adaptation on neural sensitivity to temporal characteristics of sound in the dorsal medullary nucleus and torus semicircularis of the grassfrog.

Authors:  W J Epping
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1990-04       Impact factor: 3.208

7.  Assessing the Electrode-Neuron Interface with the Electrically Evoked Compound Action Potential, Electrode Position, and Behavioral Thresholds.

Authors:  Lindsay DeVries; Rachel Scheperle; Julie Arenberg Bierer
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2016-02-29

8.  Quality-of-life benefit from cochlear implantation in the elderly.

Authors:  Katrien Vermeire; Jan P L Brokx; Floris L Wuyts; Ellen Cochet; Anouk Hofkens; Paul H Van de Heyning
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 2.311

9.  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

10.  Cochlear implant outcomes in the elderly.

Authors:  Veronique Chatelin; Eugene J Kim; Colin Driscoll; Jannine Larky; Colleen Polite; Laura Price; Anil K Lalwani
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 2.311

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.