Laser stimulation of single auditory nerve fibers

Laryngoscope

Volumn 120, Issue 10, 2010, Pages 2071-2082

  Littlefield, Philip D ^a   Vujanovic, Irena ^b   Mundi, Jagmeet ^c   Matic, Agnella Izzo ^d   Richter, Claus Peter ^b  

^a WALTER REED ARMY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c Biomedical Engineering Department   (United States)

^d NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Cochlear implant; Neuroprosthesis; Optical stimulation; Spatial selectivity; Spiral ganglion cell

Indexed keywords

GLASS FIBER;

ACOUSTIC NERVE FIBER; ARTICLE; AUDITORY STIMULATION; CLINICAL EVALUATION; COCHLEA FENESTRA; COCHLEAR NERVE; CRANIOTOMY; DIODE LASER; GERBIL; NERVE POTENTIAL; NERVE STIMULATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPIRAL GANGLION;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ACTION POTENTIALS; ANIMALS; COCHLEAR IMPLANTS; COCHLEAR NERVE; GERBILLINAE; LASERS, SEMICONDUCTOR; NERVE FIBERS;

EID: 78649824802     PISSN: 0023852X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/lary.21102     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Shannon RV. Multichannel electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve in man. I. Basic psychophysics. Hear Res 1983;11:157-189.
2. Shannon RV. Multichannel electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve in man. II. Channel interaction. Hear Res 1983;12:1-16.
3. Bierer JA, Middlebrooks JC. Cortical responses to cochlear implant stimulation: Channel interactions. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2004;5:32-48.
4. Snyder RL, Middlebrooks JC, Bonham BH. Cochlear implant electrode configuration effects on activation threshold and tonotopic selectivity. Hear Res 2008;235:23-38.
5. Izzo AD, Su HS, Pathria J, Walsh JT Jr, Whitlon DS, Richter C-P. Selectivity of neural stimulation in the auditory system: A comparison of optic and electric stimuli. J Biomed Opt 2007;12:1-7.
6. Richter CP, Bayon R, Izzo AD, et al. Optical stimulation of auditory neurons: Effects of acute and chronic deafening. Hear Res 2008;242:42-51.
7. Izzo AD, Walsh JT Jr, Ralph H, et al. Laser stimulation of auditory neurons: Effect of shorter pulse duration and penetration depth. Biophys J 2008;94:3159-3166.
8. Izzo AD, Walsh JT Jr, Jansen ED, et al. Optical parameter variability in laser nerve stimulation: A study of pulse duration, repetition rate, and wavelength. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2007;54(Pt 1):1108-1114.
9. Izzo AD, Richter CP, Jansen ED, Walsh JT Jr. Laser stimulation of the auditory nerve. Lasers Surg Med 2006;38: 745-753.
10. Fu QJ, Shannon RV. Effect of stimulation rate on phoneme recognition by nucleus-22 cochlear implant listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 2000;107:589-597.
11. Sachs MB, Abbas PJ. Rate versus level functions for auditory- nerve fibers in cats: Tone-burst stimuli. J Acoust Soc Am 1974;56:1835-1847.
12. van den Honert C, Stypulkowski PH. Physiological properties of the electrically stimulated auditory nerve. II. Single fiber recordings. Hear Res 1984;14:225-243.
13. Arsonval AD. La fibre musculaire est directement excitable par la lumiere. CR Soc Biol 1891;43:318-320.
14. Arvanitaki A, Chalazonitis N. Excitatory and inhibitory processes initiated by light and infra-red radiations in single identifiable nerve cells. In: Florey E, ed. Nervous Inhibition. New York: Pergamon Press; 1961.
15. OED Online. "Optical, a." Oxford University Press. May 24, 2010. Available at: Http://dictionary.oed.com.
16. Welch AJ, van Gemert M, eds. Optical-Thermal Response of Laser-Irradiated Tissue, 2nd ed. New York: Springer-Verlag; 2010.
17. Tuchin VV. Tissue Optics: Light Scattering Methods and Instruments for Medical Diagnosis, 2nd ed. Bellingham, WA: SPIE Press; 2007.
18. Wells J, Kao C, Mariappan K, et al. Optical stimulation of neural tissue in vivo. Optics Lett 2005;30:504-506.
19. Wells J, Kao C, Konrad P, Mahadevan-Jansen A, Jansen ED. Biophysical mechanisms responsible for pulsed low-level laser excitation of neural tissue. Proc SPIE 2006;6084.
20. Duck FA. Physical Properties of Tissue. London: Academic Press; 1990.
21. Ohlemiller KK, Echteler SM. Functional correlates of characteristic frequency in single cochlear nerve fibers of the Mongolian gerbil. J Comp Physiol A 1990;167:329-338.
22. Moxon EC. Electrical Stimulation of the Cat's Cochlea: A Study of Discharge Rates in Single Auditory Nerve Fibers [Master]. Cambridge, MA: MIT; 1965.
23. Moxin EC. Neural and Mechanical Responses to Electric Stimulation of the Cat's Inner Ear. Cambridge, MA: MIT; 1971.
24. Kiang NY, Moxon EC. Physiological considerations in artificial stimulation of the inner ear. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1972;81:714-730.
25. van den Honert C, Stypulkowski PH. Single fiber mapping of spatial excitation patterns in the electrically stimulated auditory nerve. Hear Res 1987;29:195-206.
26. Hartmann R, Topp G, Klinke R. Discharge patterns of cat primary auditory fibers with electrical stimulation of the cochlea. Hear Res 1984;13:47-62.
27. Javel E, Tong YC, Shepherd RK, Clark GM. Responses of cat auditory nerve fibers to biphasic electrical current pulses. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1987;96(Suppl 128):26-30.
28. Parkins CW. Temporal response patterns of auditory nerve fibers to electrical stimulation in deafened squirrel monkeys. Hear Res 1989;41:137-168.
29. Dynes SB, Delgutte B. Phase-locking of auditory-nerve discharges to sinusoidal electric stimulation of the cochlea. Hear Res 1992;58:79-90.
30. Shepherd RK, Javel E. Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve: II. Effect of stimulus waveshape on single fibre response properties. Hear Res 1999;130:171-188.
31. Javel E, Shepherd RK. Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve. III. Response initiation sites and temporal fine structure. Hear Res 2000;140:45-76.
32. Miller CA, Abbas PJ, Robinson BK, Rubinstein JT, Matsuoka AJ. Electrically evoked single-fiber action potentials from cat: Responses to monopolar, monophasic stimulation. Hear Res 1999;130:197-218.
33. Matsuoka AJ, Rubinstein JT, Abbas PJ, Miller CA. The effects of interpulse interval on stochastic properties of electrical stimulation: Models and measurements. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2001;48:416-424.
34. Miller CA, Abbas PJ, Robinson BK. Response properties of the refractory auditory nerve fiber. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2001;2:216-232.
35. Runge-Samuelson CL, Abbas PJ, Rubinstein JT, Miller CA, Robinson BK. Response of the auditory nerve to sinusoidal electrical stimulation: Effects of high-rate pulse trains. Hear Res 2004;194:1-13.
36. Miller CA, Abbas PJ, Robinson BK, Nourski KV, Zhang F, Jeng FC. Electrical excitation of the acoustically sensitive auditory nerve: Single-fiber responses to electric pulse trains. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2006;7:195-210.
37. Miller CA, Hu N, Zhang F, Robinson BK, Abbas PJ. Changes across time in the temporal responses of auditory nerve fibers stimulated by electric pulse trains. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2008;9:122-137.
38. Shepherd RK, Javel E. Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve. I. Correlation of physiological responses with cochlear status. Hear Res 1997;108:112-144.
39. Liberman MC, Kiang NY. Acoustic trauma in cats. Cochlear pathology and auditory-nerve activity. Acta Otolaryngol 1978;358(Suppl):1-63.
40. Parkins CW, Colombo J. Auditory-nerve single-neuron thresholds to electrical stimulation from scala tympani electrodes. Hear Res 1987;31:267-285.
41. Fearn R, Wolfe J. Relative importance of rate and place: Experiments using pitch scaling techniques with cochlear implants recipients. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2000; 185(Suppl):51-53.
42. Rose JE, Brugge JF, Anderson DJ, Hind JE. Phase-locked response to low-frequency tones in single auditory nerve fibers of the squirrel monkey. J Neurophysiol 1967;30: 769-793.
43. Clark G, Tong YC, Patrick J. Introduction. In: Clark G, ed. Cochlear Implants: Fundamentals and Applications. New York: Springer-Verlag; 2003:1-14.
44. Runge-Samuelson CL. Effects of high-rate pulse trains on electrode discrimination in cochlear implant users. Trends Amplif 2009;13:76-86.
45. Vandali AE, Whitford LA, Plant KL, Clark GM. Speech perception as a function of electrical stimulation rate: Using the Nucleus 24 cochlear implant system. Ear Hear 2000; 21:608-624.
46. Verschuur CA. Effect of stimulation rate on speech perception in adult users of the Med-El CIS speech processing strategy. Int J Audiol 2005;44:58-63.
47. Di Lella F, Bacciu A, Pasanisi E, Vincenti V, Guida M, Bacciu S. Main peak interleaved sampling (MPIS) strategy: Effect of stimulation rate variations on speech perception in adult cochlear implant recipients using the Digisonic SP cochlear implant. Acta Otolaryngol 2010;130:102-107.
48. Richter C-P, Bayon R, Izzo AD, et al. Optical stimulation of auditory neurons: Effects of acute and chronic deafening. Hear Res 2008;242:42-51.
49. Rubinstein JT, Hong R. Signal coding in cochlear implants: Exploiting stochastic effects of electrical stimulation. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2003;191(Suppl):14-19.
50. Kral A, Hartmann R, Mortazavi D, Klinke R. Spatial resolution of cochlear implants: The electrical field and excitation of auditory afferents. Hear Res 1998;121:11-28.