Multicentre investigation on electrically evoked compound action potential and stapedius reflex: How do these objective measures relate to implant programming parameters?

Cochlear Implants International

Volumn 13, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 26-34

  van den Abbeele, Thierry ^a   Noël Petroff, Nathalie ^a   Akin, Istemihan ^b   Caner, Gül ^c   Olgun, Levent ^c   Guiraud, Jeanne ^d   Truy, Eric ^d,e   Attias, Josef ^f   Raveh, Eyal ^f   Belgin, Erol ^g   Sennaroglu, Gonca ^g   Basta, Dietmar ^h   Ernst, Arneborg ^h   Martini, Alessandro ⁱ   Rosignoli, Monica ⁱ   Levi, Haya ^j   Elidan, Joseph ^j   Benghalem, Abdelhamid ^k   Amstutz Montadert, Isabelle ^l   Lerosey, Yannick ^l   de vel, Eddy ^m   Dhooge, Ingeborg ^m   Hildesheimer, Minka ⁿ   Kronenberg, Jona ⁿ   Arnold, Laure ^o   more..

^a HÔPITAL ROBERT DEBRÉ   (France)

^b DISKAPI YILDIRIM BEYAZIT TRAINING AND RESEARCH HOSPITAL   (Turkey)

^c SB   (Turkey)

^d UNIVERSITÉ LYON 1   (France)

^e EDOUARD HERRIOT HOSPITAL   (France)

^f SCHNEIDER CHILDREN S MEDICAL CENTER OF ISRAEL   (Israel)

^g HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^h CHARITÉ UNIVERSITÄTSMEDIZIN BERLIN   (Germany)

ⁱ UO Audiologia   (Italy)

^j HADASSAH HEBREW UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Israel)

^k Clinique Rachidi   (Morocco)

^l HÔPITAL CHARLES NICOLLE   (France)

^m GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

ⁿ Chaim Sheba   (Israel)

^o Advanced Bionics Europe   (France)

more..

Author keywords

Cochlear implant; Electrically evoked action potential; Electrically evoked stapedius reflex threshold; Neural response imaging; Objective measures

Indexed keywords

ACOUSTIC REFLEX; ACTION POTENTIAL; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; CHILD; CLINICAL TRIAL; COCHLEA PROSTHESIS; COHORT ANALYSIS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER PROGRAM; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; ELECTROSTIMULATION; EVOKED AUDITORY RESPONSE; FEMALE; HEARING; HEARING IMPAIRMENT; HUMAN; IMPLANTATION; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; MIDDLE EAR; MULTICENTER STUDY; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; PATIENT MONITORING; PHYSIOLOGY; POSTOPERATIVE CARE; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PROGNOSIS; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

ACTION POTENTIALS; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; CHILD; COCHLEAR IMPLANTATION; COCHLEAR IMPLANTS; COHORT STUDIES; DEAFNESS; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; ELECTRIC STIMULATION; EVOKED POTENTIALS, AUDITORY; FEMALE; HUMANS; LOUDNESS PERCEPTION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MONITORING, INTRAOPERATIVE; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; POSTOPERATIVE CARE; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROGNOSIS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; REFLEX, ACOUSTIC; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SOFTWARE; SPEECH PERCEPTION; STAPEDIUS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84856877361     PISSN: 14670100     EISSN: 17547628     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1179/1754762810Y.0000000001     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Akin I., Kuran G., Saka C., Vural M. 2006. Preliminary results on correlation between neural response imaging and, most comfortable levels' in cochlear implantation. The Journal of Laryngology and Otology, 120(4): 261-265.
2. Brown C.J., Abbas P.J., Gantz B. 1990. Electrically evoked wholenerve action potentials: data from human cochlear implant users. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 88: 1385-1391.
3. Brown C.J., Hughes M.L., Luk B. 2000. The relationship between EAP and EABR thresholds and levels used to program the nucleus 24 speech processor: data from adults. Ear and Hearing, 21(2): 151-163.
4. Cafarelli-Dees D., Dillier N., Lai W.K., Von Wallenberg E., Van Dijk B., Akdas F., Aksit M., Batman C., Beynon A., Burdo S., Chanal J-M, Collet L., Conway M., Coudert C., Craddock L., Cullington H., Deggouj N., Fraysse B., Grabel S., Kiefer J., Kiss J.G., Lenarz T., Mair A., Maunes S., Müller-Deile J., Piron J-P, Razza S., Tasche C., Thai-Van H., Toth F., Truy E., Uziel A., Smoorenburg G.F. 2005. Normative findings of electrically evoked compound action potential measurements using the neural response telemetry of the Nucleus CI24M cochlear implant system. Audiology & Neuro-otology, 10(2): 105-116.
5. Caner G., Olgun L., Gültekin G., Balaban M. 2007. Optimizing fitting in children using objective measures such as neural response imaging and electrically evoked stapedius reflex threshold. Otology & Neurotology, 28(5): 637-640.
6. Charlet de Sauvage R., Cazals Y., Erre J.P., Aran J-M 1983. Acoustically derived auditory nerve action potential evoked by electrical stimulation: an estimation of the waveform of single unit contribution. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 73: 616-627.
7. Dahm M., Shepherd RK, Clark G.M. 1993. The post-natal growth of the temporal bone and its implications for cochlear implantation in children. Acta Otolaryngologica Supplementum, 505: 1-39.
8. 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 & Hearing, 22(4): 289-299.
9. Frijns J.H., Briaire J.J., de Laat J.A., Grote J.J. 2002. Initial evaluation of the Clarion CII cochlear implant: speech perception and neural response imaging. Ear and Hearing, 23: 184-197.
10. Gordon K.A., Ebinger K.A., Gilden J.E., Shapiro W.H. 2002. Neural response telemetry in 12-to 24-month-old children. The Annals of Otology, Rhinology, & Laryngology Supplement, 189: 42-48.
11. Han D.M., Chen X.Q., Zhao X.T., Kong Y., Li Y-X, Liu S., Liu B., Mo L-Y 2005. Comparisons between neural response imaging thresholds, electrically evoked auditory reflex thresholds and most comfortable loudness levels in CII bionic ear users with HiResolution sound processing strategies. Acta Oto-Laryngologica, 125: 732-735.
12. Hodges A.V., Butts S.L., King J.E. 2003. Electrically evoked stapedial reflexes: utility in cochlear implant patients. In: HE, Cullington (ed). Cochlear Implants: Objective Measures. London: Whurr Publishers, p. 81-93.
13. Hughes M.L., Brown C.J., Abbas P.J. 2000. Comparison of EAP threshold with MAP levels in the Nucleus 24 cochlear implant: data from children. Ear and Hearing, 21: 164-174.
14. Hughes M.L., VanderWerff K.R., Brown C.J. 2001. A longitudinal study of electrode impedance, the electrically evoked compound action potential, and behavioral measures in nucleus 24 cochlear implant users. Ear and Hearing, 22(6): 471-486.
15. Jerger J., Jenkins H., Fifer R., Mecklenburg D. 1986. Stapedius reflex to electrical stimulation in a patient with a cochlear implant. Annals of Otology, Rhinology, & Laryngology, 95(2 Pt 1): 151-157.
16. Lesinski-Schiedat A., Illg A., Warnecke A., Heermann R., Bertram B., Lenarz T. 2006. Paediatric cochlear implantation in the first year of life: preliminary results. HNO, 54(7): 565-572
17. McConkey Robbins A., Burton Koch D., Osberger M.J., Zimmerman-Philips S., Kishon-Rabin L. 2004. Effect of age at cochlear implantation on auditory skill development in infants and toddlers. Archives of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, 130: 570-574.
18. NiemeyerW., Sesterhenn G. 1974. Calculating the hearing threshold from the Stapedius reflex threshold for different sound stimuli. International Journal of Audiology, 13(5): 421-427.
19. Stephan K., Welzl-Müller K. 2000. Post-operative stapedius reflex tests with simultaneous loudness scaling in patients supplied with cochlear implants. Audiology, 39: 13-18.
20. Zimmerling M.J., Hochmair E.S. 2002. EAP recordings in Ineraid patients-correlations with psychophysical measures and possible implications for patient fitting. Ear and Hearing, 23: 81-91.