Probing the Electrode-Neuron Interface With Focused Cochlear Implant Stimulation

Trends in Amplification

Volumn 14, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 84-95

  Arenberg Bierer, Julie ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

cochlear implant; electrode configuration; neural survival; psychophysics; spectral resolution

Indexed keywords

ASSOCIATION; AUDITORY REHABILITATION; AUDITORY STIMULATION; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; COCHLEA PROSTHESIS; COCHLEAR NERVE; HEARING LOSS; HUMAN; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PATIENT; PROSTHESIS; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; PSYCHOPHYSICS; REVIEW; SIGNAL PROCESSING; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; COCHLEAR IMPLANTS; COCHLEAR NERVE; CUES; HEARING IMPAIRED PERSONS; HEARING LOSS; HUMANS; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; PSYCHOACOUSTICS; REHABILITATION OF HEARING IMPAIRED; SIGNAL PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 77955884367     PISSN: 10847138     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1084713810375249     Document Type: Article

References (87)

1. Baskent, D., & Shannon, R.V. (2004). Frequency-place compression and expansion in cochlear implant listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 116, 3130-3140.
2. Bierer, J.A. (2007). Threshold and channel interaction in cochlear implant users: Evaluation of the tripolar electrode configuration. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 121, 1642-1653.
3. Bierer, J.A., & Faulkner, K.F. (2010). Identifying cochlear implant channels with poor electrode-neuron interface: Partial tripolar, single-channel thresholds, and psychophysical tuning curves. Ear and Hearing, 31, 247-258.
4. Bierer, J.A., & Middlebrooks, J.C. (2002). Auditory cortical images of cochlear-implant stimuli: Dependence on electrode configuration. Journal of Neurophysiology, 87, 478-492.
5. Busby, P.A., Whitford, L.A., Blamey, P.J., Richardson, L.M., & Clarke, G.M. (1994). Pitch perception for different modes of stimulation using the cochlear multiple-electrode prosthesis. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 95, 2658-2669.
6. Boëx, C., Kos, M.I., & Pelizzone, M. (2003). Forward masking in different cochlear implant systems. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 114(4 Pt. 1), 2058-2065.
7. Bonham, B.H., & Litvak, L.M. (2008). Current focusing and steering: Modeling, physiology, and psychophysics. Hearing Research, 242, 141-153.
8. Briaire, J.J., & Frijns, J.H. (2006). The consequences of neural degeneration regarding optimal cochlear implant position in scala tympani: A model approach. Hearing Research, 214, 17-27.
9. Chatterjee, M., Galvin, J.J., III, Fu, Q.-J., & Shannon, R.V. (2006). Effects of stimulation mode, level and location on forward-masked excitation patterns in cochlear implant patients. Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology, 7, 15-25.
10. Chatterjee, M., & Yu, J. (2010). A relation between electrode discrimination and amplitude modulation detection by cochlear implant listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 127, 415-426.
11. Cohen, L.T. (2009). Practical model description of peripheral neural excitation in cochlear implant recipients: 1. Growth of loudness and ECAP amplitude with current. Hearing Research, 247, 87-99.
12. Cohen, L.T., Richardson, L.M., Saunders, E., Cowan, R.S. (2003) Spatial spread of neural excitation in cochlear implant recipients: comparison of improved ECAP method and psychophysical forward masking. Hear Res.,179(1-2):72-87.
13. Cohen, L.T., Saunders, E., Knight, M.R., & Cowan, R.S. (2006). Psychophysical measures in patients fitted with Contour and straight Nucleus electrode arrays. Hearing Research, 212, 160-175.
14. Collins, L.M., Zwolan, T.A., & Wakefield, G.H. (1997). Comparison of electrode discrimination, pitch ranking, and pitch scaling data in postlingually deafened adult cochlear implant subjects. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 101, 440-455.
15. de Balthasar, C., Boëx, C., Cosendai, G., Valentini, G., Sigrist, A., & Pelizzone, M. (2003). Channel interactions with high-rate biphasic electrical stimulation in cochlear implant subjects. Hearing Research, 182, 77-87.
16. Donaldson, G.S., & Nelson, D.A. (2000). Place-pitch sensitivity and its relation to consonant recognition by cochlear implant listeners using the MPEAK and SPEAK speech processing strategies. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 107, 1645-1658.
17. Donaldson, G.S., Peters, M.D., Ellis, M.R., Friedman, B.J., Levine, S.C., & Rimell, F.L. (2001). Effects of the Clarion Electrode Positioning System on auditory thresholds and comfortable loudness levels in pediatric patients with cochlear implants. Archives of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, 127, 956-960.
18. Dorman, M.F., & Loizou, P.C. (1997). Speech intelligibility as a function of the number of channels of stimulation for normal-hearing listeners and patients with cochlear implants. American Journal of Otology, 18(6 Suppl.), S113-S114.
19. Dorman, M.F., Loizou, P.C., Fitzke, J., & Tu, Z. (1998). The recognition of sentences in noise by normal-hearing listeners using simulations of cochlear-implant signal processors with 6-20 channels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 104, 3583-3585.
20. Fayad, J.N., Linthicum, F.H. Jr. (2006) Multichannel cochlear implants: relation of histopathology to performance. Laryngoscope. 116(8):1310-20.
21. Fayad, J., Markarem, A., & Linthicum, F., Jr. (2009). Histopathologic assessment of fibrosis and new bone formation in implanted human temporal bones using 3D reconstruction. Otolaryngology- Head and Neck Surgery, 141, 247-252.
22. Finley, C.C., Holden, T.A., Holden, L.K., Whiting, B.R., Chole, R.A., Neely, G.J., Skinner, M.W. (2008). Role of electrode placement as a contributor to variability in cochlear implant outcomes. Otology & Neurotology, 29, 920-928.
23. Fishman, K.E., Shannon, R.V., & Slattery, W.H. (1997). Speech recognition as a function of the number of electrodes used in the SPEAK cochlear implant speech processor. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 40, 1201-1215.
24. Friesen, L.M., Shannon, R.V., Baskent, D., & Wang, X. (2001). Speech recognition in noise as a function of the number of spectral channels: Comparison of acoustic hearing and cochlear implants. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 110, 1150-1163.
25. Fu, Q.-J., & Nogaki, G. (2005). Noise susceptibility of cochlear implant users: The role of spectral resolution and smearing. Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology, 6, 19-27.
26. Fu, Q.-J., & Shannon, R.V. (2000). Effects of dynamic range and amplitude mapping on phoneme recognition in Nucleus-22 cochlear implant users. Ear and Hearing, 21, 227-235.
27. Gantz, B.J., Woodworth, G.G., Knutson, J.F., Abbas, P.J., Tyler, R.S. (1993) Multivariate predictors of success with cochlear implants. Adv Otorhinolaryngol. 48:153-67.
28. Gfeller, K., Oleson, J., Knutson, J.F., Breheny, P., Driscoll, V., & Olszewski, C. (2008). Multivariate predictors of music perception and appraisal by adult cochlear implant users. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 19, 120-134.
29. Goldwyn, J.H., Bierer, S.M., Bierer, J.A. (IN PRESS). Modeling the electrode-neuron interface of cochlear implants: Effects of neural survival, electrode placement, and the partial tripolar configuration. Hear Res.
30. Grill, W.M. (1999). Modeling the effects of electric fields on nerve fibers: Influence of tissue electrical properties. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, 46, 918-928.
31. Hanekom, T. (2005). Modelling encapsulation tissue around cochlear implant electrodes. Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing, 43, 47-55.
32. Henry, B.A., McKay, C.M., McDermott, H.J., & Clark, G.M. (2000). The relationship between speech perception and electrode discrimination in cochlear implantees. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 108(3 Pt. 1), 1269-1280.
33. Hinojosa, R., & Marion, M. (1983). Histopathology of profound sensorineural deafness. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 405, 459-484.
34. Hughes, M.L., & Abbas, P.J. (2006). Electrophysiologic channel interaction, electrode pitch ranking, and behavioral threshold in straight versus perimodiolar cochlear implant electrode arrays. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 119, 1538-1547.
35. Jolly, C.N., Spelman, F.A., & Clopton, B.M. (1996). Quadrupolar stimulation for cochlear prostheses: Modeling and experimental data. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, 43, 857-865.
36. Kawano, A., Seldon, H.L., Clark, G.M., Ramsden, R.T., & Raine, C.H. (1998). Intracochlear factors contributing to psychophysical percepts following cochlear implantation. Acta Otolaryngologica, 118, 313-326.
37. Khan, A.M., Whiten, D.M., Nadol, J.B., Jr., & Eddington, D.K. (2005). Histopathology of human cochlear implants: Correlation of psychophysical and anatomical measures. Hearing Research, 205, 83-93.
38. Koch, D.B., Downing, M., Osberger, M.J., & Litvak, L. (2007). Using current steering to increase spectral resolution in CII and HiRes 90K users. Ear and Hearing, 228, 38S-41S.
39. Koch, D.B., Osberger, M.J., Segel, P., & Kessler, D. (2004). HiResolution and conventional sound processing in the HiResolution bionic ear: Using appropriate outcome measures to assess speech recognition ability. Audiology & Neurotology, 9, 214-223.
40. Kral, A., Hartmann, R., Mortazavi, D., & Klinke, R. (1998). Spatial resolution of cochlear implants: The electrical field and excitation of auditory afferents. Hearing Research, 121, 11-28.
41. Kwon, B.J., & van den Honert, C. (2006). Effect of electrode configuration on psychophysical forward masking in cochlear implant listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 119(5 Pt. 1), 2994-3002.
42. Li, P.M., Somdas, M.A., Eddington, D.K., & Nadol, J.B., Jr. (2007). Analysis of intracochlear new bone and fibrous tissue formation in human subjects with cochlear implants. Annals of Otology, Rhinology, & Laryngology, 116, 731-738.
43. Litvak, L.M., Spahr, A.J., & Emadi, G. (2007). Loudness growth observed under partially tripolar stimulation: Model and data from cochlear implant listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 122, 967-981.
44. Loizou, P., Dorman, M., Poroy, O., & Spahr, T. (2000). Speech recognition by normal-hearing and cochlear implant listeners as a function of intensity resolution. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 108, 2377-2387.
45. Long, C., Holden, T., Parkinson, W., Smith, Z., & van den Honert, C. (2010, February). Towards a measure of neural survival in recipients of cochlear implants: Focused stimulation thresholds, speech understanding and electrode locations. Paper presented at the 33rd annual midwinter research meeting of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology, Anaheim, CA.
46. Markessis, E., Kapadia, S., Munro, K., & Moore, B.C. (2006). Modification of the threshold equalising noise (TEN) test for cochlear dead regions for use with steeply sloping high-frequency hearing loss. International Journal of Audiology, 45, 91-98.
47. McKay, C.M., McDermott, H.J., & Clark, G.M. (1996). The perceptual dimensions of single-electrode and nonsimultaneous dual-electrode stimuli in cochlear implantees. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 99, 1079-1090.
48. McKay, C.M., O'Brien, A., & James, C.J. (1999). Effect of current level on electrode discrimination in electrical stimulation. Hearing Research, 136, 159-164.
49. McKay, C.M., Remine, M.D., & McDermott, H.J. (2001). Loudness summation for pulsatile electrical stimulation of the cochlea: Effects of rate, electrode separation, level, and mode of stimulation. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 110, 1514-1524.
50. Mens, L.H., & Berenstein, C.K. (2005). Speech perception with mono- and quadrupolar electrode configurations: A crossover study. Otology & Neurotology, 26, 957-964.
51. Middlebrooks, J.C., Bierer, J.A., Bierer, S.M. The partial tripolar cochlear implant configuration assessed by forward masking in the inferior colliculus. Midwinter meeting of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology, Feb. 16-21, 2008, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
52. Moore, B.C. (2002). Psychoacoustics of normal and impaired hearing. British Medical Bulletin, 63, 121-134.
53. Moore, B.C., & Alcantara, J.I. (2001). The use of psychophysical tuning curves to explore dead regions in the cochlea. Ear and Hearing, 22, 268-278.
54. Nadol, J.B., Jr. (1997). Patterns of neural degeneration in the human cochlea and auditory nerve: Implications for cochlear implantation. Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, 117(3 Pt. 1), 220-228.
55. Nelson, D.A., Donaldson, G.S., & Kreft, H. (2008). Forward-masked spatial tuning curves in cochlear implant users. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 123, 1522-1543.
56. Ng, M., Niparko, J.K., & Nager, G.T. (2000). Inner ear pathology in severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss. In J. K. Niparko, K. I. Kirk, N. K. Mellon, A. McConkey Robbins, D. L. Tucci, & B. S. Wilson (Eds.), Cochlear implants: Principles and practices (pp. 57–92). Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
57. Nye, A.D., & Bierer, J.A. (2010, February). Poor electrode-neuron interface demonstrated by steep growth of loudness with the partial tripolar configuration. Paper presented at the 33rd annual midwinter research meeting of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology, Anaheim, CA.
58. Oxenham, A.J., & Shera, C.A. (2003). Estimates of human cochlear tuning at low levels using forward and simultaneous masking. Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology, 4, 541-554.
59. Peterson, G.E., Lehiste, I. (1962) Revised CNC lists for auditory test. J Speech Hear Disord, 27, 62-70.
60. Pfingst, B.E., Burkholder-Juhasz, R.A., Xu, L., & Thompson, C.S. (2008). Across-site patterns of modulation detection in listeners with cochlear implants. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 123, 1054-1062.
61. Pfingst, B.E., Burkholder-Juhasz, R.A., Zwolan, T.A., & Xu, L. (2008). Psychophysical assessment of stimulation sites in auditory prosthesis electrode arrays. Hearing Research, 242, 172-183.
62. Pfingst, B.E., Holloway, L.A., Zwolan, T.A., & Collins, L.M. (1999). Effects of stimulus level on electrode-place discrimination in human subjects with cochlear implants. Hearing Research, 134, 105-115.
63. Pfingst, B.E., & Xu, L. (2004). Across-site variation in detection thresholds and maximum comfortable loudness levels for cochlear implants. Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology, 5, 11-24.
64. Pfingst, B.E., Xu, L., & Thompson, C.S. (2004). Across-site threshold variation in cochlear implants: Relation to speech recognition. Audiology & Neurotology, 9, 341-352.
65. Prado-Guitierrez, P., Fewster, L.M., Heasman, J.M., McKay, C.M., & Shepherd, R.K. (2006). Effect of interphase gap and pulse duration on electrically evoked potentials is correlated with auditory nerve survival. Hearing Research, 215, 47-55.
66. Shannon, R.V. (1990) Forward masking in patients with cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am. 88(2):741-4.
67. Shannon, R.V., Zeng, F.G., Kamath, V., Wygonski, J., & Ekelid, M. (1995). Speech recognition with primarily temporal cues. Science, 270, 303-304.
68. Shepherd, R.K., Hatsushika, S., Clark, G.M. (1993). Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve: The effect of electrode position on neural excitation. Hearing Research, 66, 108-120.
69. Skinner, M.W., Holden, T.A., Whiting, B.R., Voie, A.H., Brunsden, B., Neely, J.G., Finley, C.C. (2007). In vivo estimates of the position of advanced bionics electrode arrays in the human cochlea. Annals of Otology, Rhinology, & Laryngology Supplement, 197, 2-24.
70. Snyder, R.L., Bierer, J.A., & Middlebrooks, J.C. (2004). Topographic spread of inferior colliculus activation in response to acoustic and intracochlear electric stimulation. Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology, 5, 305-322.
71. Snyder, R.L., Middlebrooks, J.C., & Bonham, B.H. (2008). Cochlear implant electrode configuration effects on activation threshold and tonotopic selectivity. Hearing Research, 235, 23-38.
72. Somdas, M.A., Li, P.M., Whiten, D.M., Eddington, D.K., & Nadol, J.B., Jr. (2007). Quantitative evaluation of new bone and fibrous tissue in the cochlea following cochlear implantation in the human. Audiology & Neurotology, 12, 277-284.
73. Stickney, G., Loizou, P., Mishra, L., Assmann, P., Shannon, R., & Opie, J. (2006). Effects of electrode design and configuration on channel interactions. Hearing Research, 1, 33-45.
74. Throckmorton, C.S., & Collins, L.M. (1999). Investigation of the effects of temporal and spatial interactions on speech-recognition skills in cochlear-implant subjects. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 105(2 Pt. 1), 861-873.
75. Throckmorton, C.S., & Collins, L.M. (2000). Investigating perceptual features of electrode stimulation via a multidimensional scaling paradigm. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 108, 2353-2365.
76. Throckmorton, C.S., & Collins, L.M. (2002). The effect of channel interactions on speech recognition in cochlear implant subjects: Predictions from an acoustic model. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 112, 285-296.
77. van den Honert, C., & Kelsall, D.C. (2007). Focused intracochlear electric stimulation with phased array channels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 121, 3703-3716.
78. van den Honert, C., & Stypulkowski, P.H. (1987a). Single fiber mapping of spatial excitation patterns in the electrically stimulated auditory nerve. Hearing Research, 29, 195-206.
79. van den Honert, C., & Stypulkowski, P.H. (1987b). Temporal response patterns of single auditory nerve fibers elicited by periodic electrical stimuli. Hearing Research, 29, 207-222.
80. Waltzman, S.B., & Roland, J.T. (2006). Cochlear implants. New York, NY: Thieme.
81. Wardrop, P., Whinney, D., Rebscher, S.J., Luxford, W., & Leake, P. (2005). A temporal bone study of insertion trauma and intracochlear position of cochlear implant electrodes. II: Comparison of Spiral Clarion and HiFocus II electrodes. Hearing Research, 203, 68-79.
82. Wardrop, P., Whinney, D., Rebscher, S.J., Roland, J.T., Jr., Luxford, W., & Leake, P.A. (2005). A temporal bone study of insertion trauma and intracochlear position of cochlear implant electrodes. I: Comparison of Nucleus banded and Nucleus Contour electrodes. Hearing Research, 203, 54-67.
83. Xu, L., & Pfingst, B.E. (2008). Spectral and temporal cues for speech recognition: Implications for auditory prostheses. Hearing Research, 242, 132-140.
84. Xu, L., Tsai, Y., & Pfingst, B.E. (2002). Features of stimulation affecting tonal-speech perception: Implications for cochlear prostheses. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 112, 247-258.
85. Zeitler, D.M., Lalwani, A.K., Roland, J.T., Jr., Habib, M.G., Gudis, D., & Waltzman, S.B. (2009). The effects of cochlear implant electrode deactivation on speech perception and in predicting device failure. Otology & Neurotology, 30, 7-13.
86. Zeng, F.G. (2002). Temporal pitch in electric hearing. Hearing Research, 174, 101-106.
87. Zwolan, T.A., Collins, L.M., & Wakefield, G.H. (1997). Electrode discrimination and speech recognition in postlingually deafened adult cochlear implant subjects. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 102, 3673-3685.