Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology 3/2019

31.01.2019 | Research Article

The Effect of Stimulus Polarity on the Relation Between Pitch Ranking and ECAP Spread of Excitation in Cochlear Implant Users

verfasst von: Emily R. Spitzer, Sangsook Choi, Michelle L. Hughes

Erschienen in: Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology | Ausgabe 3/2019

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Although modern cochlear implants (CIs) use cathodic-leading symmetrical biphasic pulses to stimulate the auditory nerve, a growing body of evidence suggests that anodic-leading pulses may be more effective. The positive polarity has been shown to produce larger electrically evoked compound action potential (ECAP) amplitudes, steeper slope of the amplitude growth function, and broader spread of excitation (SOE) patterns. Polarity has also been shown to influence pitch perception. It remains unclear how polarity affects the relation between physiological SOE and psychophysical pitch perception. Using a within-subject design, we examined the correlation between performance on a pitch-ranking task and spatial separation between SOE patterns for anodic and cathodic-leading symmetric biphasic pulses for 14 CI ears. Overall, there was no effect of polarity on either ECAP SOE patterns, pitch ranking performance, or the relation between the two. This result is likely due the use of symmetric biphasic pulses, which may have reduced the size of the effect previously observed for pseudomonophasic pulses. Further research is needed to determine if a pseudomonophasic stimulus might further improve the relation between physiology and pitch perception.
Literatur
Zurück zum Zitat Abbas PJ, Brown CJ, Shallop JK, Firszt JB, Hughes ML, Hong SH, Staller SJ (1999) Summary of results using the nucleus CI24M implant to record the electrically evoked compound action potential. Ear Hear 20:45–59CrossRefPubMed Abbas PJ, Brown CJ, Shallop JK, Firszt JB, Hughes ML, Hong SH, Staller SJ (1999) Summary of results using the nucleus CI24M implant to record the electrically evoked compound action potential. Ear Hear 20:45–59CrossRefPubMed
Zurück zum Zitat Busby PA, Battmer RD, Pesch J (2008) Electrophysiological spread of excitation and pitch perception for dual and single electrodes using the Nucleus Freedom cochlear implant. Ear Hear 29:853–864CrossRefPubMed Busby PA, Battmer RD, Pesch J (2008) Electrophysiological spread of excitation and pitch perception for dual and single electrodes using the Nucleus Freedom cochlear implant. Ear Hear 29:853–864CrossRefPubMed
Zurück zum Zitat Carlyon RP, Deeks JM, Macherey O (2013) Polarity effects on place pitch and loudness for three cochlear-implant designs and at different cochlear sites. J Acoust Soc Am 134:503–509CrossRefPubMed Carlyon RP, Deeks JM, Macherey O (2013) Polarity effects on place pitch and loudness for three cochlear-implant designs and at different cochlear sites. J Acoust Soc Am 134:503–509CrossRefPubMed
Zurück zum Zitat Cohen LT, Busby PA, Whitford LA, Clark GM (1996) Cochlear implant place psychophysics 1. Pitch estimation with deeply inserted electrodes. Audiol Neuro-Otol 1:265–277CrossRef Cohen LT, Busby PA, Whitford LA, Clark GM (1996) Cochlear implant place psychophysics 1. Pitch estimation with deeply inserted electrodes. Audiol Neuro-Otol 1:265–277CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Dhanasingh A, Jolly C (2017) An overview of cochlear implant electrode array designs. Hear Res 356:93–103CrossRefPubMed Dhanasingh A, Jolly C (2017) An overview of cochlear implant electrode array designs. Hear Res 356:93–103CrossRefPubMed
Zurück zum Zitat Frijns JHM, Briaire JJ, Grote JJ (2001) The importance of human cochlear anatomy for the results of modiolus-hugging multichannel cochlear implants. Otol Neurotol 22:340–349CrossRefPubMed Frijns JHM, Briaire JJ, Grote JJ (2001) The importance of human cochlear anatomy for the results of modiolus-hugging multichannel cochlear implants. Otol Neurotol 22:340–349CrossRefPubMed
Zurück zum Zitat Goehring JL, Neff DL, Baudhuin JL, Hughes ML (2014a) Pitch ranking, electrode discrimination, and physiological spread-of-excitation using Cochlear’s dual-electrode mode. J Acoust Soc Am 136:715–727CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Goehring JL, Neff DL, Baudhuin JL, Hughes ML (2014a) Pitch ranking, electrode discrimination, and physiological spread-of-excitation using Cochlear’s dual-electrode mode. J Acoust Soc Am 136:715–727CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Zurück zum Zitat Goehring JL, Neff DL, Baudhuin JL, Hughes ML (2014b) Pitch ranking, electrode discrimination, and physiological spread of excitation using current steering in cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am 136:3159–3171CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Goehring JL, Neff DL, Baudhuin JL, Hughes ML (2014b) Pitch ranking, electrode discrimination, and physiological spread of excitation using current steering in cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am 136:3159–3171CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Zurück zum Zitat Hamzavi J, Arnoldner C (2006) Effect of deep insertion of the cochlear implant electrode array on pitch estimation and speech perception. Acta Otolaryngol 126:1182–1187CrossRefPubMed Hamzavi J, Arnoldner C (2006) Effect of deep insertion of the cochlear implant electrode array on pitch estimation and speech perception. Acta Otolaryngol 126:1182–1187CrossRefPubMed
Zurück zum Zitat Hughes ML (2008) A re-evaluation of the relation between physiological channel interaction and electrode pitch ranking in cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am 124:2711–2714CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Hughes ML (2008) A re-evaluation of the relation between physiological channel interaction and electrode pitch ranking in cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am 124:2711–2714CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Zurück zum Zitat Hughes ML, Abbas PJ (2006) The relation between electrophysiologic channel interaction and electrode pitch ranking in cochlear implant recipients. J Acoust Soc Am 119:1527–1537CrossRefPubMed Hughes ML, Abbas PJ (2006) The relation between electrophysiologic channel interaction and electrode pitch ranking in cochlear implant recipients. J Acoust Soc Am 119:1527–1537CrossRefPubMed
Zurück zum Zitat Hughes ML, Goehring JL, Baudhuin JL (2017) Effects of stimulus polarity and artifact reduction method on the electrically evoked compound action potential. Ear Hear 38:332–343CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Hughes ML, Goehring JL, Baudhuin JL (2017) Effects of stimulus polarity and artifact reduction method on the electrically evoked compound action potential. Ear Hear 38:332–343CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Zurück zum Zitat Hughes ML, Choi S, Glickman E (2018) What can stimulus polarity and interphase gap tell us about auditory nerve function in cochlear-implant recipients? Hear Res 359:50–63CrossRefPubMed Hughes ML, Choi S, Glickman E (2018) What can stimulus polarity and interphase gap tell us about auditory nerve function in cochlear-implant recipients? Hear Res 359:50–63CrossRefPubMed
Zurück zum Zitat Jesteadt W (1980) An adaptive procedure for subjective judgments. Percept Psychophys 28:85–88CrossRefPubMed Jesteadt W (1980) An adaptive procedure for subjective judgments. Percept Psychophys 28:85–88CrossRefPubMed
Zurück zum Zitat Kalkman RK, Briaire JJ, Dekker DMT, Frijns JHM (2014) Place pitch versus electrode location in a realistic computational model of the implanted human cochlea. Hear Res 315:10–24CrossRefPubMed Kalkman RK, Briaire JJ, Dekker DMT, Frijns JHM (2014) Place pitch versus electrode location in a realistic computational model of the implanted human cochlea. Hear Res 315:10–24CrossRefPubMed
Zurück zum Zitat Landsberger DM, Svrakic S, Roland JT, Svirsky M (2015) The relationship between insertion angles, default frequency allocations, and spiral ganglion place pitch in cochlear implants. Ear Hear 36:e207–e213CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Landsberger DM, Svrakic S, Roland JT, Svirsky M (2015) The relationship between insertion angles, default frequency allocations, and spiral ganglion place pitch in cochlear implants. Ear Hear 36:e207–e213CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Zurück zum Zitat Levitt H (1971) Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. J Acoust Soc Am 49:467–477CrossRef Levitt H (1971) Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. J Acoust Soc Am 49:467–477CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Macherey O, van Wieringen A, Carlyon RP, Deeks JM, Wouters J (2006) Asymmetric pulses in cochlear implants: effects of pulse shape, polarity, and rate. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 7:253–266CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Macherey O, van Wieringen A, Carlyon RP, Deeks JM, Wouters J (2006) Asymmetric pulses in cochlear implants: effects of pulse shape, polarity, and rate. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 7:253–266CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Zurück zum Zitat Macherey O, Carlyon RP, van Wieringen A, Deeks JM, Wouters J (2008) Higher sensitivity of human auditory nerve fibers to positive electrical currents. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 9:241–251CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Macherey O, Carlyon RP, van Wieringen A, Deeks JM, Wouters J (2008) Higher sensitivity of human auditory nerve fibers to positive electrical currents. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 9:241–251CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Zurück zum Zitat Macherey O, van Wieringen A, Carlyon RP, Dhooge I, Wouters J (2010) Forward-masking patterns produced by symmetric and asymmetric pulse shapes in electric hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 127:326–338CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Macherey O, van Wieringen A, Carlyon RP, Dhooge I, Wouters J (2010) Forward-masking patterns produced by symmetric and asymmetric pulse shapes in electric hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 127:326–338CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Zurück zum Zitat Macherey O, Deeks JM, Carlyon RP (2011) Extending the limits of place and temporal pitch perception in cochlear implant users. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 12:233–251CrossRefPubMed Macherey O, Deeks JM, Carlyon RP (2011) Extending the limits of place and temporal pitch perception in cochlear implant users. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 12:233–251CrossRefPubMed
Zurück zum Zitat McKay CM, Henshall KR (2003) The perceptual effects of interphase gap duration in cochlear implant stimulation. Hear Res 181:94–99CrossRefPubMed McKay CM, Henshall KR (2003) The perceptual effects of interphase gap duration in cochlear implant stimulation. Hear Res 181:94–99CrossRefPubMed
Zurück zum Zitat Ramekers D, Versnel H, Strahl SB, Smeets EM, Klis SFL, Grolman W (2014) 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 15:187–202CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Ramekers D, Versnel H, Strahl SB, Smeets EM, Klis SFL, Grolman W (2014) 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 15:187–202CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Zurück zum Zitat Rattay F, Lutter P, Felix H (2001a) A model of the electrically excited human cochlear neuron: I. Contribution of neural substructures to the generation and propagation of spikes. Hear Res 153:43–63CrossRefPubMed Rattay F, Lutter P, Felix H (2001a) A model of the electrically excited human cochlear neuron: I. Contribution of neural substructures to the generation and propagation of spikes. Hear Res 153:43–63CrossRefPubMed
Zurück zum Zitat Rattay F, Leao RN, Felix H (2001b) A model of the electrically excited human cochlear neuron. II. Influence of the three-dimensional cochlear structure on neural excitability. Hear Res 153:64–79CrossRefPubMed Rattay F, Leao RN, Felix H (2001b) A model of the electrically excited human cochlear neuron. II. Influence of the three-dimensional cochlear structure on neural excitability. Hear Res 153:64–79CrossRefPubMed
Zurück zum Zitat Shannon RV (1985) Threshold and loudness functions for pulsatile stimulation of cochlear implants. Hear Res 18:135–143CrossRefPubMed Shannon RV (1985) Threshold and loudness functions for pulsatile stimulation of cochlear implants. Hear Res 18:135–143CrossRefPubMed
Zurück zum Zitat Shepherd RK, Javel E (1999) Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve: II. Effect of stimulus waveshape on single fibre response properties. Hear Res 130:171–188CrossRefPubMed Shepherd RK, Javel E (1999) Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve: II. Effect of stimulus waveshape on single fibre response properties. Hear Res 130:171–188CrossRefPubMed
Zurück zum Zitat Spitzer ER, Hughes ML (2017) Effect of stimulus polarity on physiological spread of excitation in cochlear implants. J Am Acad Audiol 28:786–798CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Spitzer ER, Hughes ML (2017) Effect of stimulus polarity on physiological spread of excitation in cochlear implants. J Am Acad Audiol 28:786–798CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Zurück zum Zitat Townshend B, Cotter N, Van Compernolle D, White RL (1987) Pitch perception by cochlear implant subjects. J Acoust Soc Am 82:106–115CrossRefPubMed Townshend B, Cotter N, Van Compernolle D, White RL (1987) Pitch perception by cochlear implant subjects. J Acoust Soc Am 82:106–115CrossRefPubMed
Zurück zum Zitat Undurraga JA, van Wieringen A, Carlyon RP, Macherey O, Wouters J (2010) Polarity effects on neural responses of the electrically stimulated auditory nerve at different cochlear sites. Hear Res 269:146–161CrossRefPubMed Undurraga JA, van Wieringen A, Carlyon RP, Macherey O, Wouters J (2010) Polarity effects on neural responses of the electrically stimulated auditory nerve at different cochlear sites. Hear Res 269:146–161CrossRefPubMed
Zurück zum Zitat Undurraga JA, Carlyon RP, Macherey O, Wouters J, van Wieringen A (2012) Spread of excitation varies for different electrical pulse shapes and stimulation modes in cochlear implants. Hear Res 290:21–36CrossRefPubMed Undurraga JA, Carlyon RP, Macherey O, Wouters J, van Wieringen A (2012) Spread of excitation varies for different electrical pulse shapes and stimulation modes in cochlear implants. Hear Res 290:21–36CrossRefPubMed
Zurück zum Zitat Undurraga JA, Carlyon RP, Wouters J, van Wieringen A (2013) The polarity sensitivity of the electrically stimulated human auditory nerve measured at the level of the brainstem. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 14:359–377CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Undurraga JA, Carlyon RP, Wouters J, van Wieringen A (2013) The polarity sensitivity of the electrically stimulated human auditory nerve measured at the level of the brainstem. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 14:359–377CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadaten
Titel
The Effect of Stimulus Polarity on the Relation Between Pitch Ranking and ECAP Spread of Excitation in Cochlear Implant Users
verfasst von
Emily R. Spitzer
Sangsook Choi
Michelle L. Hughes
Publikationsdatum
31.01.2019
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology / Ausgabe 3/2019
Print ISSN: 1525-3961
Elektronische ISSN: 1438-7573
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-018-00712-0

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2019

Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology 3/2019 Zur Ausgabe

Update HNO

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.