Literature DB >> 9391587

Temporal representations with cochlear implants.

B S Wilson1, C C Finley, D T Lawson, M Zerbi.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To record and characterize intracochlear evoked potentials (EPs) for a variety of electrical stimuli in studies with cochlear implant patients.
METHODS: Recordings were made with patients having direct percutaneous access to their implanted electrodes. Intracochlear voltages were recorded via unstimulated electrodes. The stimuli included trains of identical pulses, with pulse rates ranging from 100 to 4065/s, and a modulated pulse train produced by a single-channel speech processor, with the pulse rate of 824/s.
RESULTS: Magnitudes of EPs for each pulse in trains of identical pulses were uniform for pulse rates below about 200/s. For rates between about 400 and 1000/s, an alternating pattern of EP magnitudes was observed, with relatively large EPs following the odd-numbered pulses. For rates between about 1000 and 3000/s, more complex patterns were observed. After the first millisecond of each train at even higher rates, uniform EPs again were observed across pulses, although the absolute magnitude of the EPs was much lower than that observed for low rates of stimulation. The approximate rates corresponding to boundaries between these different regions varied among subjects and among electrodes within subjects. EP magnitudes for the modulated pulse train reflected the gross periodicity of the modulation waveform but did not reflect temporal details within the periods.
CONCLUSIONS: Population responses of the human auditory nerve, as indicated by EP magnitudes, reflect the amplitudes of electrical pulses for pulse rates below about 200/s and above about 3000/s. Use of intermediate rates may introduce distortions in the transmission of stimulus information with cochlear implants.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9391587

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Otol        ISSN: 0192-9763


  44 in total

1.  Discharge properties of identified cochlear nucleus neurons and auditory nerve fibers in response to repetitive electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve.

Authors:  Alexander L Babalian; David K Ryugo; Eric M Rouiller
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2003-09-04       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Desynchronization of electrically evoked auditory-nerve activity by high-frequency pulse trains of long duration.

Authors:  Leonid M Litvak; Zachary M Smith; Bertrand Delgutte; Donald K Eddington
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Improved temporal coding of sinusoids in electric stimulation of the auditory nerve using desynchronizing pulse trains.

Authors:  Leonid M Litvak; Bertrand Delgutte; Donald K Eddington
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Detection of pulse trains in the electrically stimulated cochlea: effects of cochlear health.

Authors:  Bryan E Pfingst; Deborah J Colesa; Sheena Hembrador; Stephen Y Kang; John C Middlebrooks; Yehoash Raphael; Gina L Su
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Effect of stimulation rate on cochlear implant users' phoneme, word and sentence recognition in quiet and in noise.

Authors:  Robert V Shannon; Rachel J Cruz; John J Galvin
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2010-07-17       Impact factor: 1.854

6.  Effect of stimulus level on the temporal response properties of the auditory nerve in cochlear implants.

Authors:  Michelle L Hughes; Sarah A Laurello
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2017-06-13       Impact factor: 3.208

7.  Effects of stimulation rate, mode and level on modulation detection by cochlear implant users.

Authors:  John J Galvin; Qian-Jie Fu
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2005-09

8.  Relative contributions of spectral and temporal cues for phoneme recognition.

Authors:  Li Xu; Catherine S Thompson; Bryan E Pfingst
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  The relation between auditory-nerve temporal responses and perceptual rate integration in cochlear implants.

Authors:  Michelle L Hughes; Jacquelyn L Baudhuin; Jenny L Goehring
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2014-08-02       Impact factor: 3.208

10.  Differential responses to high-frequency electrical stimulation in ON and OFF retinal ganglion cells.

Authors:  Perry Twyford; Changsi Cai; Shelley Fried
Journal:  J Neural Eng       Date:  2014-02-21       Impact factor: 5.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.