The clinical application of potentials evoked from the peripheral auditory system

Hearing Research

Volumn 242, Issue 1-2, 2008, Pages 184-197

  Miller, Charles A ^a   Brown, Carolyn J ^a   Abbas, Paul J ^a   Chi, Siu Ling ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

Author keywords

Auditory brainstem response (ABR); Cochlear implant; Compound action potential (CAP); Electric stimulation; Evoked potentials

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUDITORY STIMULATION; AUDITORY SYSTEM; COCHLEA PROSTHESIS; COCHLEAR NERVE; ELECTRODE; ELECTROSTIMULATION; EVOKED AUDITORY RESPONSE; EVOKED BRAIN STEM AUDITORY RESPONSE; HUMAN; LOUDNESS; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOPHYSICS; SPEECH PERCEPTION; SURVIVAL;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ACTION POTENTIALS; ANIMALS; COCHLEAR NERVE; ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY; EVOKED POTENTIALS, AUDITORY, BRAIN STEM; HUMANS; PSYCHOPHYSICS;

EID: 48449103696     PISSN: 03785955     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2008.04.005     Document Type: Article

References (83)

1. Abbas P.J., and Brown C.J. Electrically evoked auditory brainstem response: refractory properties and strength-duration functions. Hear. Res. 51 (1991) 139-147
2. Abbas P.J., Hughes M.L., Brown C.J., Miller C.A., and South H. Channel interaction in cochlear implant users evaluated using the electrically evoked compound action potential. Audiol. Neurootol. 9 (2004) 203-213
3. Abbas P.J., Brown C.J., and Etler C.P. Utility of electrically evoked potentials in cochlear implant users. In: Waltzman S., and Roland T. (Eds). Cochlear Implants. second ed. (2006), Thieme Publisher, New York
4. Bevington P.R., and Robinson D.K. Data Reduction and Error Analysis for the Physical Sciences. third ed. (2003), McGraw-Hill, New York
5. Blamey P., Arndt P., Bergeron F., Bredberg G., Brimacombe J., Facer G., Larky J., Lindstrom B., Nedzelski J., Peterson A., Shipp D., Staller S., and Whitford L. Factors affecting auditory performance of postlinguistically deaf adults using cochlear implants. Audiol. Neurootol. 1 (1996) 293-306
6. Briaire J.J., and Frijns J.H. Field patterns in a 3D tapered spiral model of the electrically stimulated cochlea. Hear. Res. 148 (2000) 18-30
7. Briaire J.J., and Frijns J.H. Unraveling the electrically evoked compound action potential. Hear. Res. 205 (2005) 143-156
8. Briaire J.J., and Frijns J.H. The consequences of neural degeneration regarding optimal cochlear implant position in scala tympani: a model approach. Hear. Res. 214 (2006) 17-27
9. Brown C.J., and Abbas P.J. Electrically evoked whole-nerve action potentials: parametric data from the cat. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 88 (1990) 2205-2210
10. Brown C.J., Abbas P.J., and Gantz B. Electrically evoked whole-nerve action potentials: data from human cochlear implant users. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 88 (1990) 1385-1391
11. Brown C.J., Abbas P.J., Bertschy M., Tyler R.S., Lowder M., Takahashi G., Purdy S., and Gantz B.J. Longitudinal assessment of physiological and psychophysical measures in cochlear implant users. Ear Hear. 16 (1995) 439-449
12. Brown C.J., Abbas P.J., Borland J., and Bertschy M.R. Electrically evoked whole nerve action potentials in Ineraid cochlear implant users: responses to different stimulating electrode configurations and comparison to psychophysical responses. J. Speech Hear. Res. 39 (1996) 453-467
13. Brown C.J., Abbas P.J., and Gantz B.J. Preliminary experience with neural response telemetry in the nucleus CI24M cochlear implant. Am. J. Otol. 19 (1998) 320-327
14. Brown C.J., Hughes M.L., Lopez S.M., and Abbas P.J. Relationship between EABR thresholds and levels used to program the CLARION speech processor. Ann. Otol. Rhinol. Laryngol. Suppl. 177 (1999) 50-57
15. Brown C.J., Hughes M.L., Luk B., Abbas P.J., Wolaver A., and Gervais J. The relationship between EAP and EABR thresholds and levels used to program the nucleus 24 speech processor: data from adults. Ear Hear. 21 (2000) 151-163
16. Brummer S.B., and Turner M.J. Electrical stimulation with Pt electrodes: I-a method for determination of ''real" electrode areas. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 24 (1977) 436-439
17. Chi, S.-L., 2001. Correlating loudness and EAP measures. Doctoral thesis, University of Iowa.
18. Cohen L.T., Richardson L.M., Saunders E., and Cowan R.S. Spatial spread of neural excitation in cochlear implant recipients: comparison of improved ECAP method and psychophysical forward masking. Hear. Res. 179 (2003) 72-87
19. Cohen L.T., Saunders E., and Richardson L.M. Spatial spread of neural excitation: comparison of compound action potential and forward-masking data in cochlear implant recipients. Int. J. Audiol. 43 (2004) 346-355
20. Cohen, L.T., O'Leary, S.J., White, M.W., 2007. Practical ECAP-based methods for characterizing neural response in individual cochlear implant patients: 1. Low pulse rates. In: Fifth International Symposium: Objective Measures in Cochlear and Brainstem Implants. Varese, Italy (abstract).
21. Dorman M.F., Smith L.M., Dankowski K., McCandless G., and Parkin J.L. Long-term measures of electrode impedance and auditory thresholds for the Ineraid cochlear implant. J. Speech Hear. Res. 35 (1992) 1126-1130
22. Duckert L.G. Morphological changes in the normal and neomycin-perfused guinea pig cochlea following chronic prosthetic implantation. Laryngoscope 93 (1983) 841-855
23. Eddington D.K. Speech discrimination in deaf subjects with cochlear implants. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 68 (1980) 885-891
24. Eddington D.K. Speech recognition in deaf subjects with multichannel intracochlear electrodes. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 405 (1983) 241-258
25. Fayad J.N., and Linthicum Jr. F.H. Multichannel cochlear implants: relation of histopathology to performance. Laryngoscope 116 (2006) 1310-1320
26. Finley C.C., Wilson B.S., and White M.W. Models of neural responsiveness to electrical stimulation. In: Miller J.M., and Spelman F.A. (Eds). Cochlear Implants: Models of the Electrically Stimulated Ear (1990), Springer-Verlag, New York
27. Franck, K.H., 1999. The electrically evoke whole nerve action potential: fitting applications for cochlear implant users. Doctoral dissertation, University of Washington, Seattle.
28. Frijns J.H., Briaire J.J., and Grote J.J. The importance of human cochlear anatomy for the results of modiolus-hugging multichannel cochlear implants. Otol. Neurotol. 22 (2001) 340-349
29. Gantz B.J., Tyler R.S., Knutson J.F., Woodworth G., Abbas P., McCabe B.F., Hinrichs J., Tye-Murray N., Lansing C., Kuk F., et al. Evaluation of five different cochlear implant designs: audiologic assessment and predictors of performance. Laryngoscope 98 (1988) 1100-1106
30. Gardi J.N., and Berlin C.I. Binaural interaction components. Their possible origins in guinea pig auditory brainstem response. Arch. Otolaryngol. 107 (1981) 164-168
31. Goldstein M.H., and Kiang N.Y.-S. Synchrony of neural activity in electric responses evoked by transient acoustic stimuli. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 30 (1958) 107-114
32. Gyo K., and Yanagihara N. Electrically and acoustically evoked brain stem responses in guinea pig. Acta Otolaryngol 90 (1980) 25-31
33. Hall R.D. Estimation of surviving spiral ganglion cells in the deaf rat using the electrically evoked auditory brainstem response. Hear. Res. 49 (1990) 155-168
34. Hay-McCutcheon M.J., Brown C.J., and Abbas P.J. An analysis of the impact of auditory-nerve adaptation on behavioral measures of temporal integration in cochlear implant recipients. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 118 (2005) 2444-2457
35. Hughes M.L., Vander Werff K.R., Brown C.J., Abbas P.J., Kelsay D.M.R., Teagle H.F.B., and Lowder M.W. A longitudinal study of electrode impedance, the electrically evoked compound action potential, and behavioral measures in Nucleus 24 cochlear implant users. Ear Hear. 22 (2001) 471-486
36. Hughes M.L., Brown C.J., and Abbas P.J. Sensitivity and specificity of averaged electrode voltage measures in cochlear implant recipients. Ear Hear. 25 (2004) 431-446
37. Hughes M.L., and Abbas P.J. The relation between electrophysiologic channel interaction and electrode pitch ranking in cochlear implant recipients. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 119 (2006) 1527-1537
38. Jyung R.W., Miller J.M., and Cannon S.C. Evaluation of eighth nerve integrity by the electrically evoked middle latency response. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 101 (1989) 670-682
39. Kandel E.R., Schartz J.H., and Jessell T.M. Principles of Neural Science. fourth ed. (2000), McGraw-Hill, New York
40. Kawano A., Seldon H.L., Clark G.M., Ramsden R.T., and Raine C.H. Intracochlear factors contributing to psychophysical percepts following cochlear implantation. Acta Otolaryngol. 118 (1998) 313-326
41. Khan A.M., Whiten D.M., Nadol Jr. J.B., and Eddington D.K. Histopathology of human cochlear implants: correlation of psychophysical and anatomical measures. Hear. Res. 205 (2005) 83-93
42. Kiang N.Y.-s. Discharge Patterns of Single Fibers in the Cat's Auditory Nerve (1965), M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, MA
43. Kiang N.Y., and Moxon E.C. Physiological considerations in artificial stimulation of the inner ear. Ann. Otol. Rhinol. Laryngol. 81 (1972) 714-730
44. Leake, P., Snyder, R.L., Schreiner, C.E., Rebscher, S., Vollmer, M., Moore, C.M., Beitel, R.E., Hradek, G.T., 2000. Protective effects of patterned electrical stimulation on the deafened auditory system. Contract N01-DC-7-2105. Final Report.
45. Leake P.A., Hradek G.T., Vollmer M., and Rebscher S.J. Neurotrophic effects of GM1 ganglioside and electrical stimulation on cochlear spiral ganglion neurons in cats deafened as neonates. J. Comp. Neurol. 501 (2007) 837-853
46. Macherey O., van Wieringen A., Carlyon R.P., Deeks J.M., and Wouters J. Asymmetric pulses in cochlear implants: effects of pulse shape, polarity, and rate. J. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol. 7 (2006) 253-266
47. Macherey, O., Carlyon, R.P., van Wieringen, A., Deeks, J.M., Wouters, J., in press. Higher sensitivity of human auditory nerve fibers to positive electrical currents. J. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol.
48. Matsuoka A.J., Abbas P.J., Rubinstein J.T., and Miller C.A. The neuronal response to electrical constant-amplitude pulse train stimulation: evoked compound action potential recordings. Hear. Res. 149 (2000) 115-128
49. Meddis R. Auditory-nerve first-spike latency and auditory absolute threshold: a computer model. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 119 (2006) 406-417
50. Miller C.A., Abbas P.J., and Robinson B.K. The use of long-duration current pulses to assess nerve survival. Hear. Res. 78 (1994) 11-26
51. Miller C.A., Woodruff K.E., and Pfingst B.E. Functional responses from guinea pigs with cochlear implants. I. Electrophysiological and psychophysical measures. Hear. Res. 92 (1995) 85-99
52. Miller C.A., Faulkner M.J., and Pfingst B.E. Functional responses from guinea pigs with cochlear implants. II. Changes in electrophysiological and psychophysical measures over time. Hear. Res. 92 (1995) 100-111
53. Miller C.A., Abbas P.J., Rubinstein J.T., Robinson B.K., Matsuoka A.J., and Woodworth G. Electrically evoked compound action potentials of guinea pig and cat: responses to monopolar, monophasic stimulation. Hear. Res. 119 (1998) 142-154
54. Miller C.A., Abbas P.J., and Rubinstein J.T. An empirically based model of the electrically evoked compound action potential. Hear. Res. 135 (1999) 1-18
55. Miller C.A., Abbas P.J., and Brown C.J. An improved method of reducing stimulus artifact in the electrically evoked whole-nerve potential. Ear Hear. 21 (2000) 280-290
56. Miller C.A., Robinson B.K., Rubinstein J.T., Abbas P.J., and Runge-Samuelson C.L. Auditory nerve responses to monophasic and biphasic electric stimuli. Hear. Res. 151 (2001) 79-94
57. Miller C.A., Abbas P.J., Hay-McCutcheon M.J., Robinson B.K., Nourski K.V., and Jeng F.C. Intracochlear and extracochlear ECAPs suggest antidromic action potentials. Hear. Res. 198 (2004) 75-86
58. Miller J.M., Duckert L.G., Malone M.A., and Pfingst B.E. Cochlear prostheses: stimulation-induced damage. Ann. Otol. Rhinol. Laryngol. 92 (1983) 599-609
59. Nadol Jr. J.B., Young Y.S., and Glynn R.J. Survival of spiral ganglion cells in profound sensorineural hearing loss: implications for cochlear implantation. Ann. Otol. Rhinol. Laryngol. 98 (1989) 411-416
60. Nadol Jr. J.B., Shiao J.Y., Burgess B.J., Ketten D.R., Eddington D.K., Gantz B.J., Kos I., Montandon P., Coker N.J., Roland Jr. J.T., and Shallop J.K. Histopathology of cochlear implants in humans. Ann. Otol. Rhinol. Laryngol. 110 (2001) 883-891
61. Nagel D. Compound action potential of the cochlear nerve evoked electrically. Electrophysiological study of the acoustic nerve (guinea pig). Arch. Otorhinolaryngol. 206 (1974) 293-298
62. Pfingst B.E. Changes over time in thresholds for electrical stimulation of the cochlea. Hear. Res. 50 (1990) 225-236
63. Rattay F. Analysis of models for external stimulation of axons. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 33 (1986) 974-977
64. Rosen S., Faulkner A., and Wilkinson L. Adaptation by normal listeners to upward spectral shifts of speech: implications for cochlear implants. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 106 (1999) 3629-3636
65. Rubinstein J.T. Axon termination conditions for electrical stimulation. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 40 (1993) 654-663
66. Shannon R.V. Multichannel electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve in man. I. Basic psychophysics. Hear. Res. 11 (1983) 157-189
67. Shannon R.V. Multichannel electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve in man. II. Channel interaction. Hear. Res. 12 (1983) 1-16
68. Shepherd R.K., Webb R.L., Clark G.M., Pyman B.C., Hirshorn M.S., Murray M.T., and Houghton M.E. Implanted material tolerance studies for a multiple-channel cochlear prosthesis. Acta Otolaryngol. Suppl. 411 (1984) 71-81
69. Shepherd R.K., Hatsushika S., and Clark G.M. Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve: the effect of electrode position on neural excitation. Hear. Res. 66 (1993) 108-120
70. Smith Z.M., and Delgutte B. Using evoked potentials to match interaural electrode pairs with bilateral cochlear implants. J. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol. 8 (2007) 134-151
71. Smith L., and Simmons F.B. Estimating eighth nerve survival by electrical stimulation. Ann. Otol. Rhinol. Laryngol. 92 (1983) 19-23
72. Smoorenburg G.F., Willeboer C., and van Dijk J.E. Speech perception in nucleus CI24M cochlear implant users with processor settings based on electrically evoked compound action potential thresholds. Audiol. Neurootol. 7 (2002) 335-347
73. Stypulkowski P.H., and van den Honert C. Physiological properties of the electrically stimulated auditory nerve. I. Compound action potential recordings. Hear. Res. 14 (1984) 205-223
74. van den Honert C., and Stypulkowski P.H. Single fiber mapping of spatial excitation patterns in the electrically stimulated auditory nerve. Hear. Res. 29 (1987) 195-206
75. van Wieringen A., Macherey O., Carlyon R.P., Deeks J.M., and Wouters J. Alternative pulse shapes in electrical hearing. Hear. Res. 242 (2008) 154-163
76. Viemeister N.F., and Wakefield G.H. Temporal integration and multiple looks. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 90 (1991) 858-865
77. Waltzman S.B., Cohen N.L., and Shapiro W.H. Effects of chronic electrical stimulation on patients using a cochlear prosthesis. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 105 (1991) 797-801
78. White M.W., Merzenich M.M., and Gardi J.N. Multichannel cochlear implants. Channel interactions and processor design. Arch. Otolaryngol. 110 (1984) 493-501
79. Wilson, B.S., Finley, C.C., Zerbi, M., Lawson, D.T., 1994. Speech processors for auditory prostheses. Seventh Quarterly Progress Report. NIH Contract N01-DC-2-2401 N01-DC-2-2401, Research Triangle Institute, Research Triangle Park.
80. Wilson, B.S., Finley, C.C., Lawson, D.T., Zerbi, M., 1995. Speech processors for auditory prostheses. Eleventh Quarterly Progress Report. NIH Contract N01-DC-2-2401 N01-DC-2-2401, Research Triangle Institute, Research Triangle Park.
81. Woo, J.H., Abbas, P.J., Miller, C.A., 2007. Effect of high rate pulse train on neural responses: its computational approach, In: 2007 Conference on Implantable Auditory Prostheses, Tahoe City, CA, USA (abstract).
82. Young E.D., and Sachs M.B. Representation of steady-state vowels in the temporal aspects of the discharge patterns of populations of auditory-nerve fibers. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 66 (1979) 1381-1403
83. Zhang F., Miller C.A., Robinson B.K., Abbas P.J., and Hu N. Changes across time in spike rate and spike amplitude of auditory nerve fibers stimulated by electric pulse trains. J. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol. 8 (2007) 356-372