Importance of cochlear health for implant function

Hearing Research

Volumn 322, Issue , 2015, Pages 77-88

  Pfingst, Bryan E ^a   Zhou, Ning ^a,b   Colesa, Deborah J ^a   Watts, Melissa M ^a   Strahl, Stefan B ^c   Garadat, Soha N ^a,d   Schvartz Leyzac, Kara C ^a   Budenz, Cameron L ^a   Raphael, Yehoash ^a   Zwolan, Teresa A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^b EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c MED EL GmbH   (Austria)

^d UNIVERSITY OF JORDAN   (Jordan)

Author keywords

AAV; Ad; ASM; BDNF; C level; CUNY sentences; DPI; EABR; ECAP; GDT; IHC; MDT; MPI; N1; NT 3; NTF 3; P2; SGN; SNR; T level; TI

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; AUDITORY NERVOUS SYSTEM; AUDITORY STIMULATION; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; COCHLEA; COCHLEA PROSTHESIS; COCHLEAR IMPLANTATION; DEVICES; ELECTROSTIMULATION; HUMAN; INNERVATION; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PATIENT; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; PSYCHOLOGY; REHABILITATION; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ANIMALS; AUDITORY PATHWAYS; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; COCHLEA; COCHLEAR IMPLANTATION; COCHLEAR IMPLANTS; ELECTRIC STIMULATION; HUMANS; PERSONS WITH HEARING IMPAIRMENTS; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 84925414358     PISSN: 03785955     EISSN: 18785891     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2014.09.009     Document Type: Review

References (78)

1. Bas E., Van De Water T.R., Lumbreras V., Rajguru S., Goss G., Hare J.M., Goldstein B.J. Adult human nasal mesenchymal-like stem cells restore cochlear spiral ganglion neurons after experimental lesion. Stem Cells Dev. 2014, 23:502-514.
2. Bierer J.A. Threshold and channel interaction in cochlear implant users: evaluation of the tripolar electrode configuration. J.Acoust. Soc. Am. 2007, 121:1642-1653.
3. Bierer J.A., Faulkner K.F. Identifying cochlear implant channels with poor electrode-neuron interface: partial tripolar, single-channel thresholds and psychophysical tuning curves. Ear Hear. 2010, 31:247-258.
4. Budenz C.L., Pfingst B.E., Raphael Y. The use of neurotrophin therapy in the inner ear to augment cochlear implantation outcomes. Anat. Rec. 2012, 295:1896-1908.
5. Chen W., Jongkamonwiwat N., Abbas L., Eshtan S.J., Johnson S.L., Kuhn S., Milo M., Thurlow J.K., Andrews P.W., Marcotti W., Moore H.D., Rivolta M.N. Restoration of auditory evoked responses by human ES-cell-derived otic progenitors. Nature 2012, 490:278-282.
6. Clark G.M., Blamey P.J., Brown A.M., Gusby P.A., Dowell R.C., Franz B.K., Pyman B.C., Shepherd R.K., Tong Y.C., Webb R.L., Hirshorn M.S., Kuzma J., Mecklenburg M.J., Money D.K., Patrick J.F., Seligman P.M. The University of Melbourne - nucleus multi-electrode cochlear implant. Adv. Otorhinolaryngol. 1987, 38:1-181.
7. Clark G.M., Pyman B.C., Bailey Q.R. The surgery for multiple-electrode cochlear implantations. J.Laryngol. Otol. 1979, 93:215-223.
8. Donaldson G.S., Nelson D.A. Place-pitch sensitivity and its relation to consonant recognition by cochlear implant listeners using the MPEAK and SPEAK speech processing strategies. J.Acoust. Soc. Am. 2000, 107:1645-1658.
9. Fayad J.N., Linthicum F.H. Multichannel cochlear implants: relation of histopathology to performance. Laryngoscope 2006, 116:1310-1320.
10. Friesen L.M., Shannon R.V., Baskent D., Wang X. Speech recognition in noise as a function of the number of spectral channels: comparison of acoustic hearing and cochlear implants. J.Acoust. Soc. Am. 2001, 110:1150-1163.
11. Fu Q.-J. Temporal processing and speech recognition in cochlear implant users. Neuroreport 2002, 13:1635-1639.
12. Fukui H., Wong H.T., Beyer L.A., Case B.G., Swiderski D.L., Di Polo A., Ryan A.F., Raphael Y. BDNF gene therapy induces auditory nerve survival and fiber sprouting in deaf Pou4f3 mutant mice. Sci. Rep. 2012, 2:838.
13. Garadat S.N., Pfingst B.E. Relationship between gap detection thresholds and loudness in cochlear-implant users. Hear. Res. 2011, 275:130-138.
14. Garadat S.N., Zwolan T.A., Pfingst B.E. Across-site patterns of modulation detection: relation to speech recognition. J.Acoust. Soc. Am. 2012, 131:4030-4041. Erratum: J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 134, 715.
15. Garadat S.N., Zwolan T.A., Pfingst B.E. Using temporal modulation sensitivity to select stimulation sites for processor maps in cochlear implant listeners. Audiol. Neurotol. 2013, 18:247-260.
16. Gerken G.M., Bhat V.K.H., Hutchison-Clutter M. Auditory temporal integration and the power function model. J.Acoust. Soc. Am. 1990, 88:767-778.
17. Glueckert R., Bitsche M., Miller J.M., Zhu Y., Prieskorn D.M., Altschuler R.A., Schrott-Fischer A. Deafferentation-associated changes in afferent and efferent processes in the guinea pig cochlea and afferent regeneration with chronic intrascalar brain-derived neurotrophic factor and acidic fibroblast growth factor. J.Comp. Neurol. 2008, 507:1602-1621.
18. Hall R.D. Estimation of surviving spiral ganglion cells in the deaf rat using the electrically evoked auditory brainstem response. Hear. Res. 1990, 49:155-168.
19. Hanekom T. Modelling encapsulation tissue around cochlear implant electrodes. Med. Biol. Eng. Comput. 2005, 43:47-55.
20. Hendricks J.L., Chikar J.A., Crumling M.A., Raphael Y., Martin D.C. Localized cell and drug delivery for auditory prostheses. Hear. Res. 2008, 242:117-131.
21. Heydebrand G., Hale S., Potts L., Gotter B., Skinner M. Cognitive predictors of improvements in adults' spoken word recognition six months after cochlear implant activation. Audiol. Neurotol. 2007, 12:254-264.
22. Hinojosa R., Marion M. Histopathology of profound sensorineural deafness. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1983, 405:459-484.
23. Hochmair I., Nopp P., Jolly C., Schmidt M., Schosser H., Garnham C., Anderson I. MED-EL Cochlear implants: state of the art and a glimpse into the future. Trends Amplif. 2006, 10:201-219.
24. Hochmair-Desoyer I.J., Hochmair E.S., Burian K., Fischer R.E. Four years of experience with cochlear prostheses. Med. Prog. Technol. 1981, 8:107-119.
25. Hughes M.L., Stille L.J. Psychophysical versus physiological spatial forward masking and the relation to speech perception in cochlear implants. Ear Hear. 2008, 29:435-452.
26. Jolly C., Garnham C., Mirzadeh H., Truy E., Martini A., Kiefer J., Braun S. Electrode features for hearing preservation and drug delivery strategies. Adv. Otorhinolaryngol. 2010, 67:28-42.
27. Kang S.Y., Colesa D.J., Swiderski D.L., Su G.L., Raphael Y., Pfingst B.E. Effects of hearing preservation on psychophysical responses to cochlear implant stimulation. J.Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol. 2010, 11:245-265.
28. Kawamoto K., Ishimoto S., Minoda R., Brough D.E., Raphael Y. Math1 gene transfer generates new cochlear hair cells in mature guinea pigs invivo. J.Neurosci. 2003, 23:4395-4400.
29. Khan A.M., Handzel O., Burgess B.J., Damian D., Eddington D.K., Nadol J.B. Is word recognition correlated with the number of surviving spiral ganglion cells and electrode insertion depth in human subjects with cochlear implants?. Laryngoscope 2005, 115:672-677.
30. Khan A.M., Whiten D.M., Nadol J.B., Eddington D.K. Histopathology of human cochlear implants: correlation of psychophysical and anatomical measures. Hear. Res. 2005, 205:83-93.
31. Lalwani A.K., Walsh B.J., Carvalho G.J., Muzyczka N., Mhatre A.N. Expression of adeno-associated virus (AAV) integrated transgene within the mammalian vestibular organs. Am. J. Otol. 1998, 19:390-395.
32. Long C.J., Holden T.A., McClelland G.H., Parkinson W.S., Shelton C., Kelsall D.C., Smith Z.M. Examining the electro-neural interface of cochlear implant users using psychophysics, CT scans, and speech understanding. J.Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol. 2014, 15:293-304.
33. McKay C.M., Chandan K., Akhoun I., Siciliano C., Kluk K. Can ECAP measures be used for totally objective programming of cochlear implants?. J.Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol. 2013, 14:879-890.
34. McKay C.M., Lim H.H., Lenarz T. Temporal processing in the auditory system: insights from cochlear and auditory midbrain implantees. J.Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol. 2013, 14:103-124.
35. Miller C.A., Brown C.J., Abbas P.J., Chi S.-L. The clinical application of potentials evoked from the peripheral auditory system. Hear. Res. 2008, 242:184-197.
36. Nadol 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 J.T., Shallop J.K. Histopathology of cochlear implants in humans. Ann. Otol. Rhinol. Laryngol. 2001, 110:883-891.
37. Paasche G., Tasche C., Stover T., Lesinski-Schiedat A., Lenarz T. The long-term effects of modified electrode surfaces and intracochlear corticosteroids on postoperative impedances in cochlear implant patients. Otol. Neurotol. 2009, 30:592-598.
38. Pfingst B.E. Changes over time in thresholds for electrical stimulation of the cochlea. Hear. Res. 1990, 50:225-236.
39. Pfingst B.E. Effects of electrode configuration on cochlear implant modulation detection thresholds. J.Acoust. Soc. Am. 2011, 129:3908-3915.
40. Pfingst B.E., Burkholder-Juhasz R.A., Xu L., Thompson C.S. Across-site patterns of modulation detection in listeners with cochlear implants. J.Acoust. Soc. Am. 2008, 123:1054-1062.
41. Pfingst B.E., Colesa D.J., Hembrador S., Kang S.Y., Middlebrooks J.C., Raphael Y., Su G.L. Detection of pulse trains in the electrically stimulated cochlea: effects of cochlear health. J.Acoust. Soc. Am. 2011, 130:3954-3968.
42. Pfingst B.E., Colesa D.J., Watts M.M., Su G.L., Budenz C.L., Raphael Y. Neurotrophin gene therapy in deafened ears with cochlear implants: long-term effects on nerve survival and functional measures. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol. Abst. 2014, 37:174.
43. Pfingst B.E., Xu L. Across-site variation in detection thresholds and maximum comfortable loudness levels for cochlear implants. J.Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol. 2004, 5:11-24.
44. Pfingst B.E., Xu L., Thompson C.S. Across-site threshold variation in cochlear implants: relation to speech recognition. Audiol. Neurotol. 2004, 9:341-352.
45. Pfingst B.E., Xu L., Thompson C.S. Effects of carrier pulse rate and stimulation site on modulation detection by subjects with cochlear implants. J.Acoust. Soc. Am. 2007, 121:2236-2246.
46. Pinyon J.L., Tadros S.F., Froud K.E., Wong Ann C.Y., Tompson I.T., Crawford E.N., Ko M., Morris R., Klugmann M., Housley G.D. Close-field electroporation gene delivery using the cochlear implant electrode array enhances the bionic ear. Sci. Transl. Med. 2014, 6:233ra54.
47. Prado-Guitierrez P., Fewster L.M., Heasman J.M., McKay C.M., Shepherd R.K. Effect of interphase gap and pulse duration on electrically evoked potentials is correlated with auditory nerve survival. Hear. Res. 2006, 215:47-55.
48. Ramekers D., Versnel H., Grolman W., Klis S.F. Neurotrophins and their role in the cochlea. Hear. Res. 2012, 288:19-33.
49. Ramekers D., Versnel H., Strahl S.B., Smeets E.M., Klis S.F., Grolman W. Auditory-nerve responses to varied inter-phase gap and phase duration of the electric pulse stimulus as predictors for neuronal degeneration. J.Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol. 2014, 15:187-202.
50. Rudnicki A., Shivatzki S., Beyer L.A., Takada Y., Raphael Y., Avraham K.B. microRNA-224 regulates Pentraxin 3, a component of the humoral arm of innate immunity, in inner ear inflammation. Hum. Mol. Genet. 2014, 23:3138-3146.
51. Sapieha P.S., Hauswirth W.W., Di Polo A. Extracellular signal-regulated kinases 1/2 are required for adult retinal ganglion cell axon regeneration induced by fibroblast growth factor-2. J.Neurosci. Res. 2006, 83:985-995.
52. Schindler R.A., Merzenich M.M. Cochlear Implants 1985, Raven Press, New York.
53. Shannon R.V. Amodel of temporal integration and forward masking for electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve. Cochlear Implants. Models of the Electrically Stimulated Ear 1989, 187-203. Springer-Verlag, New York. J.M. Miller, F.A. Spelman (Eds.).
54. Shepherd R.K., Hatsushika S., Clark G.M. Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve: the effect of electrode position on neural excitation. Hear. Res. 1993, 66:108-120.
55. Shi F., Edge A.S. Prospects for replacement of auditory neurons by stem cells. Hear. Res. 2013, 297:106-112.
56. Shibata S.B., Budenz C.L., Bowling S.A., Pfingst B.E., Raphael Y. Nerve maintenance and regeneration in the damaged cochlea. Hear. Res. 2011, 281:56-64.
57. Shibata S.B., Cortez S.R., Beyer L.A., Wiler J.A., Di Polo A., Pfingst B.E., Raphael Y. Transgenic BDNF induces nerve fiber regrowth into the auditory epithelium in deaf cochleae. Exp. Neurol. 2010, 223:464-472.
58. Shou J., Zheng J.L., Gao W.Q. Robust generation of new hair cells in the mature mammalian inner ear by adenoviral expression of Hath1. Mol. Cell. Neurosci. 2003, 23:169-179.
59. Smith L., Simmons F.B. Estimating eighth nerve survival by electrical stimulation. Ann. Otol. Rhinol. Laryngol. 1983, 92:19-23.
60. Su G.L., Colesa D.J., Pfingst B.E. Effects of deafening and cochlear implantation procedures on postimplantation psychophysical electrical detection thresholds. Hear. Res. 2008, 241:64-72.
61. Sugawara M., Corfas G., Liberman M.C. Influence of supporting cells on neuronal degeneration after hair cell loss. J.Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol. 2005, 6:136-147.
62. Takada Y., Beyer L.A., Swiderski D.L., O'Neal A.L., Prieskorn D.M., Shivatzki S., Avraham K.B., Raphael Y. Connexin 26 null mice exhibit spiral ganglion degeneration that can be blocked by BDNF gene therapy. Hear. Res. 2014, 309:124-135.
63. Turner C.W., Reiss L.A., Gantz B.J. Combined acoustic and electric hearing: preserving residual acoustic hearing. Hear. Res. 2008, 242:164-171.
64. Viemeister N.F., Wakefield G.H. Temporal integration and multiple looks. J.Acoust. Soc. Am. 1991, 90:858-865.
65. von Bartheld C.S., Fritzsch B. Comparative analysis of neurotrophin receptors and ligands in vertebrate neurons: tools for evolutionary stability or changes in neural circuits?. Brain Behav. Evol. 2006, 68:157-172.
66. von Ilberg C.A., Baumann U., Kiefer J., Tillein J., Adunka O.F. Electric-acoustic stimulation of the auditory system: a review of the first decade. Audiol. Neurotol. 2011, 16(Suppl.2):1-30.
67. Watts M.M., Pfingst B.E., Colesa D.J., Raphael Y., Kabara L.L., Budenz C.L. Functional changes over time after deafening, post-deafening treatments, and cochlear implantation. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol. Abst. 2014, 37:315-316.
68. Wilson B.S., Dorman M.F. Cochlear implants: a remarkable past and a brilliant future. Hear. Res. 2008, 242:3-21.
69. Wilson B.S., Finley C.C., Lawson D.T., Wolford R.D., Eddington D.K., Rabinowitz W.M. Better speech recognition with cochlear implants. Nature 1991, 352:236-238.
70. Wise A.K., Hume C.R., Flynn B.O., Jeelall Y.S., Suhr C.L., Sgro B.E., O'Leary S.J., Shepherd R.K., Richardson R.T. Effects of localized neurotrophin gene expression on spiral ganglion neuron resprouting in the deafened cochlea. Mol. Ther. 2010, 18:1111-1122.
71. Wise A.K., Richardson R., Hardman J., Clark G., O'Leary S. Resprouting and survival of guinea pig cochlear neurons in response to the administration of the neurotrophins brain-derived neurotrophic factor and neurotrophin-3. J.Comp. Neurol. 2005, 487:147-165.
72. Yu Q., Wang Y., Chang Q., Wang J., Gong S., Li H., Lin X. Virally expressed connexin26 restores gap junction function in the cochlea of conditional Gjb2 knockout mice. Gene Ther. 2014, 21:71-80.
73. Zhou N., Pfingst B.E. Psychophysically-based site selection coupled with dichotic stimulation improves speech recognition in noise with bilateral cochlear implants. J.Acoust. Soc. Am. 2012, 132:994-1008.
74. Zhou N., Pfingst B.E. Comparison of temporal integration and multipulse integration functions in humans with cochlear implants. Conference on Implantable Auditory Prosthesis Program Book 2013, 194.
75. Zhou N., Pfingst B.E. Relationship between multipulse integration and speech recognition with cochlear implants. J.Acoust. Soc. Am. 2014, 136:1257-1268.
76. Zhou N., Pfingst B.E. Effects of site-specific level adjustments on speech recognition with cochlear implants. Ear Hear. 2014, 35:30-34.
77. Zhou N., Xu L., Pfingst B.E. Characteristics of detection thresholds and maximum comfortable loudness levels as a function of pulse rate in human cochlear implant users. Hear. Res. 2012, 284:25-32.
78. Zwolan T.A., Collins L.M., Wakefield G.H. Electrode discrimination and speech recognition in postlingually deafened adult cochlear implant subjects. J.Acoust. Soc. Am. 1997, 102:3673-3685.