Low-resolution electromagnetic tomography (LORETA) in children with cochlear implants: A preliminary report

International Journal of Audiology

Volumn 43, Issue SUPPL. 1, 2004, Pages

  Henkin, Yael ^a,b   Kishon Rabin, Liat ^a   Tatin Schneider, Simona ^a,b   Urbach, Doron ^c   Hildesheimer, Minka ^a,b   Kileny, Paul R ^d  

^a TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

^b SHEBA MEDICAL CENTER   (Israel)

^c Orgil Medical Equipment ^*  (Israel)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN HEALTH SYSTEM   (United States)

Author keywords

Auditory event related potentials (AERPs); Cochlear implant; Low resolution electromagnetic tomography (LORETA)

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COCHLEA PROSTHESIS; CONTROLLED STUDY; ELECTRIC ACTIVITY; EVOKED AUDITORY RESPONSE; FEMALE; FRONTAL LOBE; HUMAN; LOW RESOLUTION ELECTROMAGNETIC TOMOGRAPHY; MALE; PRESCHOOL CHILD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION; TEMPORAL LOBE; TOMOGRAPHY;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; AUDITORY CORTEX; CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; CHILD; COCHLEAR IMPLANTS; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; FEMALE; FRONTAL LOBE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PARIETAL LOBE; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 13144265738     PISSN: 14992027     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Anderer, P., Saletu, B., Saletu-Zyhlarz, G., Gruber, D., Metka, M., et al. 2004. Brain regions activated during an auditory discrimination task in insomniac post-menopausal patients before and after hormone replacement therapy. Low resolution electromagnetic tomography applied to event-related potentials. Neuropsychobiology, 49(3), 134-153.
2. Binder, J.F., Frost, J.A., Hammeke, T.A., Bellgowan, P.S.F., Springer, J.A., et al. 2000. Human temporal lobe activation by speech and nonspeech sounds. Cereb Cortex, 10, 512-528.
3. Binder, J.F., Frost, J.A., Hammeke, T.A., Cox, R.W., Rao, S.M., et al. 1997. Human brain language areas identified by functional magnetic resonance imaging. J Neurosci, 17(1), 353-362.
4. Boatman, D.F., Lesser, R.P., Hall, C.B. & Gordon, B. 1994. Auditory perception of segmental features: a functional-neuroanatomic study. J Neurolinguistics, 8(3), 225-234.
5. Buchel, C., Coull, J.T. & Friston, K.J. 1999. The predictive value of changes in the effective connectivity for human learning. Science, 183, 1538-1541.
6. Demonet, J.F., Chollet, F., Ramsay, S., Cardebat, D., Nepoulous, J., et al. 1992. The anatomy of phonological and semantic processing in normal subjects. Brain, 115, 1753-1768.
7. Giraud, A.L., Truy, E., Frackowiak, R.S.J., Gregoire, M.C., Pujol, J.F., et al. 2000. Differential recruitment of the speech processing system in healthy subjects and rehabilitated cochlear implant patients. Brain, 123, 1391-1402.
8. Groenen, P.A.P., Beynon, A.J., Snik, A.F.M. & Van den Broek, P. 2001. Speech evoked cortical potentials and speech recognition in cochlear implant users. Scand Audiol, 30, 31-40.
9. Howard, D., Patterson, K., Wise, R., Brown, D., Friston, K., et al. 1992. The cortical localization of the lexicons, positron emission tomography evidence. Brain, 115, 1769-1782.
10. Kileny, P.R., Boerst, A. & Zwolan, T. 1997. Cognitive evoked potentials to speech and tonal stimuli in children with implants. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 117, 161-169.
11. Kubo, T., Yamamoto, T., Iwaki, M., Matsukawa, K.D. & Tamura, M. 2001. Significance of auditory evoked responses (EABR and P3) in a cochlear implant subject. Acta Otolaryngol, 121, 257-261.
12. Naito, Y., Okazawa, H., Honjo, I., Hirano, S., Takahashi, H., et al. 1995. Cortical activation with sound stimulation in cochlear implant users demonstrated by positron emission tomography. Cogn Brain Res, 2, 207-214.
13. Ofek, E. & Pratt, H. 2004. Ear advantage and attention: an ERP study of auditory cued attention. Hear Res, 189, 107-118.
14. 15O and PET. Brain, 119, 1297-1306.
15. Pascual-Marqui, R.D. 1999. Review of methods for solving the EEG inverse problem. Int J Bioelectromag, 1, 75-86.
16. Pascual-Marqui, R.D., Esslen, M., Kochi, K. & Lehmann, D. 2002. Functional imaging with low resolution electromagnetic tomography (LORETA): a review. Methods Find Exp Clin Pharmacol, 24C, 91-95.
17. Pascual-Marqui, R.D., Michel, C.M. & Lehmann, D. 1994. Low resolution electromagnetic tomography: a new method for localizing electrical activity in the brain. Int J Psychophys, 18(1), 49-65.
18. Peterson, S.E., Fox, P.T., Posner, M.I., Mintun, M. & Raichle, M.E. 1988. Positron emission tomographic studies of the cortical anatomy of single-word processing. Nature, 331, 585-589.
19. Sinai, A. & Pratt, H. 2003. High-resolution time course of hemispheric dominance revealed by low-resolution electromagnetic tomography. Clin Neurophysiol, 114, 1181-1188.
20. Wise, R., Chollet, F., Hadar, U., Friston, K., Hoffner, E., et al. 1991. Distribution of cortical neural networks involved in word comprehension and word retrieval. Brain, 114, 1803-1817.
21. Wong, D., Miyamoto, R.T., Pisoni, D.B., Sehgal, M. & Hutchins, G.D. 1999. PET imaging of cochlear-implant and normal-hearing subjects listening to speech and nonspeech. Hear Res, 132, 34-42.
22. Zattore, R.J., Belin, P. & Penhune, V.B. 2002. Structure and function of auditory cortex: music and speech. Trends Cogn Sci, 6, 37-46.
23. Zatorre, R.J., Evans, A.C., Meyer, E. & Gjedde, A. 1992. Lateralization of phonetic and pitch discrimination in speech processing. Science, 256, 846-848.