Neural response telemetry reconsidered: II. the influence of neural population on the ecap recovery function and refractoriness

Ear and Hearing

Volumn 31, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 380-391

  Botros, Andrew ^a,b   Psarros, Colleen ^c  

^a Research and Technology Labs   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

^c Sydney Cochlear Implant Centre   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ANIMAL; ARTICLE; AUDITORY NERVOUS SYSTEM; AUDITORY STIMULATION; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; CAT; CONVALESCENCE; HEARING; HEARING LOSS; HUMAN; IMPLANTATION; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; NERVE CELL; PATHOLOGY; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; PROSTHESIS; PSYCHOPHYSICS; TELEMETRY;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ADULT; AGED; ANIMALS; AUDITORY PATHWAYS; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; CATS; COCHLEAR IMPLANTATION; HEARING LOSS; HUMANS; LOUDNESS PERCEPTION; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, NEUROLOGICAL; NEURONS; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; PSYCHOACOUSTICS; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; TELEMETRY;

EID: 77951966329     PISSN: 01960202     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3181cb41aa     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Abbas, P. J., & Brown, C. J. (1991). Electrically evoked auditory brainstem response: Refractory properties and strength-duration functions. Hear Res, 51, 139-148.
2. Abbas, P. J., Hughes, M. L., Brown, C. J., et al. (2004). Channel interaction in cochlear implant users evaluated using the electrically evoked compound action potential. Audiol Neurootol, 9, 203-213.
3. Battmer, R. D., Dillier, N., Lai, W. K., et al. (2004). Evaluation of the Neural Response Telemetry (NRT) capabilities of the Nucleus Research Platform 8: Initial results from the NRT trial. Int J Audiol, 43 (Suppl 1), 10-15.
4. Battmer, R.-D., Lai, W. K., Dillier, N., et al. (2005). Correlation of NRT recovery function parameters and speech perception results for different stimulation rates. In: T. Lenarz & R.-D. Battmer (Eds). Abstracts of the Fourth International Symposium and Workshops on Objective Measures in Cochlear Implants (p 21).
5. Botros, A., & Psarros, C. (2010). Neural Response Telemetry reconsidered: I.-The relevance of ECAP threshold profiles and scaled profiles to cochlear implant fitting. Ear Hear, 31, xx-xx.
6. Botros, A., van Dijk, B., & Killian, M. (2007). AutoNRT: An automated system that measures ECAP thresholds with the Nucleus Freedom cochlear implant via machine intelligence. Artif Intell Med, 40, 15-28.
7. Brown, C. J., & Abbas, P. J. (1990). Electrically evoked whole-nerve action potentials: Parametric data from the cat. J Acoust Soc Am, 88, 2205-2210.
8. Brown, C. J., Abbas, P. J., & Gantz, B. (1990). Electrically evoked whole-nerve action potentials: Data from human cochlear implant users. J Acoust Soc Am, 88, 1385-1391.
9. Bruce, I. C., Irlicht, L. S., White, M. W., et al. (1999a). A stochastic model of the electrically stimulated auditory nerve: Pulse-train response. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng, 46, 630-637.
10. Bruce, I. C., White, M. W., Irlicht, L. S., et al. (1999b). A stochastic model of the electrically stimulated auditory nerve: Single-pulse response. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng, 46, 617-629.
11. Carhart, R., & Jerger, J. F. (1959). Preferred method for clinical determination of pure-tone thresholds. J Speech Hear Disorders, 24, 330-345.
12. Cohen, L. T., Richardson, L. M., Saunders, E., et al. (2003). Spatial spread of neural excitation in cochlear implant recipients: Comparison of improved ECAP method and psychophysical forward masking. Hear Res, 179, 72-87.
13. Cohen, L. T., Saunders, E., Knight, M. R., et al. (2006). Psychophysical measures in patients fitted with Contour and straight Nucleus electrode arrays. Hear Res, 212, 160-175.
14. Fayad, J. N., & Linthicum, F. H. (2006). Multichannel cochlear implants: Relation of histopathology to performance. Laryngoscope, 116, 1310-1320
15. Finley, C., Wilson, B., van den Honert, C., et al. (1997). Speech processors for auditory prostheses. Sixth Quarterly Progress Report, NIH Project N01-DC-5-2103.
16. Finley, C. C., Holden, T. A., Holden, L. K., et al. (2008). Role of electrode placement as a contributor to variability in cochlear implant outcomes. Otol Neurotol, 29, 920-928.
17. Fletcher, H., & Munson, W. (1933). Loudness, its definition, measurement and calculation. J Acoust Soc Am, 5, 82-108.
18. Franck, K. H., & Norton, S. J. (2001). Estimation of psychophysical levels using the electrically evoked compound action potential measured with the neural response telemetry capabilities of Cochlear Corporation's CI24M device. Ear Hear, 22, 289-299.
19. Goldstein, M. H., & Kiang, N. Y.-S. (1958). Synchrony of neural activity in electric responses evoked by transient acoustic stimuli. J Acoust Soc Am, 30, 107-114.
20. Hall, R. D. (1990). Estimation of surviving spiral ganglion cells in the deaf rat using the electrically evoked auditory brainstem response. Hear Res, 49, 155-168.
21. Hughes, M. L., & Abbas, P. J. (2006). Electrophysiologic channel interaction, electrode pitch ranking, and behavioral threshold in straight versus perimodiolar cochlear implant arrays. J Acoust Soc Am, 119, 1538-1547.
22. Kawano, A., Seldon, H. L., Clark, G. M., et al. (1998). Intracochlear factors contributing to psychophysical percepts following cochlear implantation. Acta Otolaryngol, 118, 313-326.
23. Khan, A. M., Whiten, D. M., Nadol, J. B., et al. (2005). Histopathology of human cochlear implants: Correlation of psychophysical and anatomical measures. Hear Res, 205, 83-93.
24. Kiefer, J., Hohl, S., Stürzebecher, E., et al. (2001). Comparison of speech recognition with different speech coding strategies (SPEAK, CIS, and ACE) and their relationship to telemetric measures of compound action potentials in the Nucleus CI24M cochlear implant system. Audiol, 40, 32-42.
25. McKay, C. M., & Fewster, L. (2004). Effect of interphase-gap and pulse-duration on evoked-potential amplitudes and loudness in cochlear implantees. Int Congress Series, 1273, 60-63.
26. McKay, C. M., Fewster, L., & Dawson, P. (2005). A different approach to using neural response telemetry for automated cochlear implant processor programming. Ear Hear, 26 (Suppl), 38S-44S.
27. McKay, C. M., & McDermott, H. J. (1998). Loudness perception with pulsatile electrical stimulation: The effect of interpulse intervals. J Acoust Soc Am, 104, 1061-1074.
28. McKay, C. M., & McDermott, H. J. (1999). The perceptual effects of current phase duration in electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve. J Acoust Soc Am, 106, 998-1009.
29. Miller, C. A., Abbas, P. J., & Brown, C. J. (2000). An improved method of reducing stimulus artifact in the electrically evoked whole-nerve potential. Ear Hear, 21, 280-290.
30. Miller, C. A., Abbas, P. J., & Robinson, B. K. (2001). Response properties of the refractory auditory nerve fiber. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol, 2, 216-232.
31. Miller, C. A., Abbas, P. J., & Rubinstein, J. T. (1999). An empirically based model of the electrically evoked compound action potential. Hear Res, 135, 1-18.
32. Morsnowski, A., Charasse, B., Collet, L., et al. (2006). Measuring the refractoriness of the electrically stimulated auditory nerve. Audiol Neurootol, 11, 389-402.
33. Müller-Deile, J., Thai-Van, H., Morsnowski, A., et al. (2003). Correlations of auditory nerve refractoriness and the offset between auditory nerve response thresholds and psychophysical thresholds in Nucleus cochlear implant recipients. In: R. K. Shepherd & M. A. Svirsky (Eds). Abstracts of the 2003 Conference on Implantable Auditory Prostheses (p 178).
34. Nadol, J. B., Young, Y.-S., & Glynn, R. J. (1989). Survival of spiral ganglion cells in profound sensorineural hearing loss: Implications for cochlear implantation. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol, 98, 411-416.
35. Otte, J., Schuknecht, H. F., & Kerr, A. G. (1978). Ganglion cell populations in normal and pathological human cochleae. Implications for cochlear implantation. Laryngoscope, 8, 1231-1246.
36. Patrick, J. F., Busby, P. A., & Gibson, P. J. (2006). The development of the Nucleus Freedom cochlear implant system. Trends Amplif, 10, 175-200.
37. Prado-Guitierrez, P., Fewster, L. M., Heasman, J. M., et al. (2006). Effect of interphase gap and phase duration on electrically evoked potentials is correlated with auditory nerve survival. Hear Res, 215, 47-55.
38. Relkin, E. M., & Doucet, J. R. (1997). Is loudness simply proportional to the auditory nerve spike count? J Acoust Soc Am, 101, 2735-2740.
39. Shepherd, R. K., Hatsushika, S., & Clark, G. M. (1993). Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve: The effect of electrode position on neural excitation. Hear Res, 66, 108-120.
40. Shepherd, R. K., & Javel, E. (1997). Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve: I.-Correlation of physiological response with cochlear status. Hear Res, 108, 112-144.
41. Shepherd, R. K., Roberts, L. A., & Paolini, A. G. (2004). Long-term sensorineural hearing loss induces functional changes in the rat auditory nerve. Eur J Neurosci, 20, 3131-3140.
42. Shpak, T., Berlin, M., & Luntz, M. (2004). Objective measurements of auditory nerve recovery function in Nucleus CI24 implantees in relation to subjective preference of stimulation rate. Acta Otolaryngol, 124, 679-683. (Pubitemid 39093350)
43. Stypulkowski, P. H., & van den Honert, C. (1984). Physiological properties of the electrically stimulated auditory nerve: I.-Compound action potential recordings. Hear Res, 14, 205-223.
44. Tackmann, W., & Lehmann, H. J. (1974). Refractory period in human sensory nerve fibers. Eur Neurol, 12, 277-292.
45. Turner, C., Mehr, M., Hughes, M., et al. (2002). Within-subject predictors of speech recognition in cochlear implants: A null result. Acoust Res Lett Online, 3, 95-100.
46. van Dijk, B., Botros, A. M., Battmer, R. D., et al. (2007). Clinical results of AutoNRT, a completely automatic ECAP recording system for cochlear implants. Ear Hear, 28, 558-570.
47. Verveen, A. A. (1961). Fluctuation in Excitability. PhD thesis. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.