Literature DB >> 9307818

The future of cochlear implants.

B S Wilson.   

Abstract

Remarkable progress has been made in recent years in the design and application of processing strategies for cochlear implants. Most notably, use of the new spectral peak (SPEAK) and continuous interleaved sampling (CIS) strategies have provided large improvements in speech reception performance compared with prior strategies (NIH Consensus Statement, 1995; Skinner et al., 1994a; Wilson et al., 1991). All major manufacturers of multichannel implant systems, including Advanced Bionics Corp., Bionic Systems, Cochlear Pty. Ltd., and Med El, now offer CIS or CIS-like strategies in their speech processors. The SPEAK strategy was developed by Cochlear Pty. Ltd and continues to be one of the options available in that company's devices. The principal purpose of this editorial is to present some of the many possibilities for further improvements in performance. To the extent that such possibilities are realized, implant systems of the future may be quite different from present systems, with different processing strategies, electrode designs, telemetry features, and fitting procedures.

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9307818     DOI: 10.3109/03005369709076795

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Audiol        ISSN: 0300-5364


  15 in total

1.  [Cochlear implantation with preservation of residual deep frequency hearing].

Authors:  J Müller; J Helms
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 1.284

2.  Models of brainstem responses to bilateral electrical stimulation.

Authors:  H Steven Colburn; Yoojin Chung; Yi Zhou; Andrew Brughera
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2008-10-22

3.  Sequential stream segregation using temporal periodicity cues in cochlear implant recipients.

Authors:  Robert S Hong; Christopher W Turner
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Cochlear-implant high pulse rate and narrow electrode configuration impair transmission of temporal information to the auditory cortex.

Authors:  John C Middlebrooks
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2008-04-30       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  Effects of hearing preservation on psychophysical responses to cochlear implant stimulation.

Authors:  Stephen Y Kang; Deborah J Colesa; Donald L Swiderski; Gina L Su; Yehoash Raphael; Bryan E Pfingst
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2009-11-10

6.  Sensitivity of bilateral cochlear implant users to fine-structure and envelope interaural time differences.

Authors:  Victor A Noel; Donald K Eddington
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 7.  Speech Understanding in Complex Listening Environments by Listeners Fit With Cochlear Implants.

Authors:  Michael F Dorman; Rene H Gifford
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2017-10-17       Impact factor: 2.297

Review 8.  Assessment of responses to cochlear implant stimulation at different levels of the auditory pathway.

Authors:  Paul J Abbas; Carolyn J Brown
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2014-11-04       Impact factor: 3.208

9.  Forward masking patterns by low and high-rate stimulation in cochlear implant users: Differences in masking effectiveness and spread of neural excitation.

Authors:  Ning Zhou; Lixue Dong; Susannah Dixon
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2020-02-15       Impact factor: 3.208

10.  Cochlear implants: a remarkable past and a brilliant future.

Authors:  Blake S Wilson; Michael F Dorman
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2008-06-22       Impact factor: 3.208

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.