Literature DB >> 7744715

Consequences of chronic extracochlear electrical stimulation in neonatally deafened cats.

P A Leake1, R L Snyder, G T Hradek, S J Rebscher.   

Abstract

This investigation examined the consequences of neonatal deafness and chronic electrical stimulation of the cochlea in the developing auditory system. Cats were bilaterally deafened by daily ototoxic drug administration for two weeks after birth. Electrical stimulation was initiated at 6-9 weeks of age and continued for up to 6 months, using monopolar round window electrodes that synchronously excited auditory neurons throughout the cochlea. Morphometric evaluation of the density of spiral ganglion cell somata within Rosenthal's canal demonstrated that chronic stimulation induced an increase of about 6% in neuronal survival. Although this difference was statistically significant, extracochlear stimulation in these cats was less effective in preventing neural degeneration than lower intensity, more restricted intracochlear stimulation that was shown in a previous study to induce an average increase of about 13% in neuronal survival. Electrophysiological recording experiments conducted in the inferior colliculus in these animals indicated that monopolar extracochlear stimulation can induce profound alterations in the spatial (frequency) selectivity of the auditory midbrain. On average, results were similar to those previously reported for bipolar intracochlear stimulation, showing about a two-fold expansion of the central representation of chronically stimulated electrodes. However, results with extracochlear stimulation showed much greater variability among individual animals. The results presented suggest that it is problematic to effect consistent 'whole' nerve stimulation using monopolar round window electrodes. Moreover, this mode of stimulation can induce profound functional alterations in the central nervous system and is substantially less effective in forestalling the degeneration of auditory neurons than intracochlear stimulation. Both these results contraindicate the implantation of such electrodes in young children for the purpose of maintaining the integrity of the auditory system for later application of a multichannel cochlear implant.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7744715     DOI: 10.1016/0378-5955(94)00167-o

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


  17 in total

1.  Topographic spread of inferior colliculus activation in response to acoustic and intracochlear electric stimulation.

Authors:  Russell L Snyder; Julie A Bierer; John C Middlebrooks
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2004-08-12

2.  Does cochlear implantation and electrical stimulation affect residual hair cells and spiral ganglion neurons?

Authors:  Anne Coco; Stephanie B Epp; James B Fallon; Jin Xu; Rodney E Millard; Robert K Shepherd
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2006-12-15       Impact factor: 3.208

3.  Effects of age at onset of deafness and electrical stimulation on the developing cochlear nucleus in cats.

Authors:  Olga Stakhovskaya; Gary T Hradek; Russell L Snyder; Patricia A Leake
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2008-05-25       Impact factor: 3.208

4.  Stem cell transplantation for auditory nerve replacement.

Authors:  Richard A Altschuler; K Sue O'Shea; Josef M Miller
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2008-06-13       Impact factor: 3.208

5.  Neural Processing of Acoustic and Electric Interaural Time Differences in Normal-Hearing Gerbils.

Authors:  Maike Vollmer
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2018-06-29       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  Brain-derived neurotrophic factor promotes cochlear spiral ganglion cell survival and function in deafened, developing cats.

Authors:  Patricia A Leake; Gary T Hradek; Alexander M Hetherington; Olga Stakhovskaya
Journal:  J Comp Neurol       Date:  2011-06-01       Impact factor: 3.215

Review 7.  Cochlear implantation in adults with prelingual deafness. Part II. Underlying constraints that affect audiological outcomes.

Authors:  Su Wooi Teoh; David B Pisoni; Richard T Miyamoto
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 3.325

8.  Factors influencing neurotrophic effects of electrical stimulation in the deafened developing auditory system.

Authors:  Patricia A Leake; Olga Stakhovskaya; Gary T Hradek; Alexander M Hetherington
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2008-06-07       Impact factor: 3.208

9.  Cortical encoding of pitch contour changes in cochlear implant users: a mismatch negativity study.

Authors:  Fawen Zhang; Chelsea Benson; Qian-Jie Fu
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2013-08-06       Impact factor: 1.854

Review 10.  Combined electro-acoustic stimulation: a beneficial union?

Authors:  K N Talbot; D E H Hartley
Journal:  Clin Otolaryngol       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 2.597

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.