Literature DB >> 8473242

Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve: the effect of electrode position on neural excitation.

R K Shepherd1, S Hatsushika, G M Clark.   

Abstract

Histological studies have shown that the Melbourne/Cochlear electrode array lies along the outer wall of the scala tympani and is therefore some distance from the residual VIIIth nerve elements. In order to investigate the influence of electrode position on neural excitation we systematically varied the position of the electrode array within the cat scala tympani while recording electrically evoked auditory brainstem responses (EABRs). Using both normal hearing and long-term deafened animals, we observed significant reductions in EABR thresholds as the electrode array was moved from the outer wall towards the modiolus. Further threshold reductions were observed when the array was placed underneath the osseous spiral lamina (OSL) close to the peripheral dendrites. These changes were independent of the bipolar inter-electrode separation, and were observed over a wide range of cochlear pathologies varying from normal to a moderate spiral ganglion cell loss. Interestingly, the one animal exhibiting extensive neural loss showed no correlation between EABR threshold and electrode position. There was also a general decrease in the gradient of the EABR input-output function as the electrode array was moved closer to the neural elements. This was, however, only statistically significant when the electrode was positioned adjacent to the peripheral dendrites. Significant reductions in EABR threshold were also observed as the inter-electrode spacing of the bipolar electrodes was increased. The gradient of the EABR input-output function also increased with increasing inter-electrode spacing, although again, this was only significant when the electrode array was positioned close to the neural elements. The present results indicate that the optimum placement of a Melbourne/Cochlear electrode array is adjacent to the peripheral dendrites. However, such a site would be difficult to achieve in practice while minimizing insertion trauma. An array lying adjacent to the modiolus would be a safe alternative while ensuring a significant reduction in threshold compared with the existing site (outer wall). This placement should result in more localized neural excitation patterns, an increase in the number of bipolar electrodes available, together with an increase in their dynamic range. These changes may lead to further improvements in speech perception among cochlear implant patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8473242     DOI: 10.1016/0378-5955(93)90265-3

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


  65 in total

1.  Across-site variation in detection thresholds and maximum comfortable loudness levels for cochlear implants.

Authors:  Bryan E Pfingst; Li Xu
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2003-11-20

2.  Intra-Operative Neural Response Telemetry and Acoustic Reflex Assessment using an Advance-In-Stylet Technique and Modiolus-Hugging: A prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Abdulrahman Hagr
Journal:  Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J       Date:  2011-08-15

Review 3.  Probing the electrode-neuron interface with focused cochlear implant stimulation.

Authors:  Julie Arenberg Bierer
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2010-06

4.  Modelling encapsulation tissue around cochlear implant electrodes.

Authors:  T Hanekom
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 2.602

Review 5.  The development of the Nucleus Freedom Cochlear implant system.

Authors:  James F Patrick; Peter A Busby; Peter J Gibson
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2006-12

6.  Assessment of electrode placement and audiological outcomes in bilateral cochlear implantation.

Authors:  George B Wanna; Jack H Noble; Theodore R McRackan; Benoit M Dawant; Mary S Dietrich; Linsey D Watkins; Alejandro Rivas; Theodore A Schuman; Robert F Labadie
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 2.311

7.  Cochlear implant electrode configuration effects on activation threshold and tonotopic selectivity.

Authors:  Russell L Snyder; John C Middlebrooks; Ben H Bonham
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2007-10-11       Impact factor: 3.208

8.  Intracochlear assessment of electrode position after cochlear implant surgery by means of multislice computer tomography.

Authors:  Gijs K A van Wermeskerken; Mathias Prokop; Adriaan F van Olphen; Frans W J Albers
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2007-07-14       Impact factor: 2.503

9.  New strategies for high precision surgery of the temporal bone using a robotic approach for cochlear implantation.

Authors:  Thomas Klenzner; Chiu Chun Ngan; Felix Bernhard Knapp; Hayo Knoop; Jan Kromeier; Antje Aschendorff; Evangelos Papastathopoulos; Joerg Raczkowsky; Heinz Wörn; Joerg Schipper
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2008-10-21       Impact factor: 2.503

10.  Role of electrode placement as a contributor to variability in cochlear implant outcomes.

Authors:  Charles C Finley; Timothy A Holden; Laura K Holden; Bruce R Whiting; Richard A Chole; Gail J Neely; Timothy E Hullar; Margaret W Skinner
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 2.311

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.