Effects of Hearing Preservation on Psychophysical Responses to Cochlear Implant Stimulation
Tóm tắt
Previous studies have shown that residual acoustic hearing supplements cochlear implant function to improve speech recognition in noise as well as perception of music. The current study had two primary objectives. First, we sought to determine how cochlear implantation and electrical stimulation over a time period of 14 to 21 months influence cochlear structures such as hair cells and spiral ganglion neurons. Second, we sought to investigate whether the structures that provide acoustic hearing also affect the perception of electrical stimulation. We compared psychophysical responses to cochlear implant stimulation in two groups of adult guinea pigs. Group I (11 animals) received a cochlear implant in a previously untreated ear, while group II (ten animals) received a cochlear implant in an ear that had been previously infused with neomycin to destroy hearing. Psychophysical thresholds were measured in response to pulse-train and sinusoidal stimuli. Histological analysis of all group I animals and a subset of group II animals was performed. Nine of the 11 group I animals showed survival of the organ of Corti and spiral ganglion neurons adjacent to the electrode array. All group I animals showed survival of these elements in regions apical to the electrode array. Group II animals that were examined histologically showed complete loss of the organ of Corti in regions adjacent and apical to the electrode array and severe spiral ganglion neuron loss, consistent with previous reports for neomycin-treated ears. Behaviorally, group II animals had significantly lower thresholds than group I animals in response to 100 Hz sinusoidal stimuli. However, group I animals had significantly lower thresholds than group II animals in response to pulse-train stimuli (0.02 ms/phase; 156 to 5,000 pps). Additionally, the two groups showed distinct threshold versus pulse rate functions. We hypothesize that the differences in detection thresholds between groups are caused by the electrical activation of the hair cells in group I animals and/or differences between groups in the condition of the spiral ganglion neurons.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Berrettini S, Forli F, Passetti S (2008) Preservation of residual hearing following cochlear implantation: comparison between three surgical techniques. J Laryngol Otol 122:246–252
Cartee LA, van den Honert C, Finley CC, Miller RL (2000) Evaluation of a model of the cochlear neural membrane. I. Physiological measurement of membrane characteristics in response to intrameatal electrical stimulation. Hear Res 146:143–152
Cartee LA, Miller CA, van den Honert C (2006) Spiral ganglion cell site of excitation I: comparison of scala tympani and intrameatal electrode responses. Hear Res 215:10–21
Chatfield C, Collins AJ (1980) Introduction to multivariate analysis. Chapman and Hall, London, U.K.
Chikar JA, Colesa DJ, Swiderski DL, Polo AD, Raphael Y, Pfingst BE (2008) Over-expression of BDNF by adenovirus with concurrent electrical stimulation improves cochlear implant thresholds and survival of auditory neurons. Hear Res 245:24–34
Coco A, Epp SB, Fallon JB, Xu J, Millard RE, Shepherd RK (2007) Does cochlear implantation and electrical stimulation affect residual hair cells and spiral ganglion neurons? Hear Res 225:60–70
Colombo J, Parkins CW (1987) A model of electrical excitation of the mammalian auditory-nerve neuron. Hear Res 31:287–311
Davies E, Gladstone HB, Williams H, Hradek G, Shah SB, Schindler RA (1994) A model for long-term intracochlear administration of pharmacologic agents. Am J Otol 15:757–761
Dolan DF, Nuttall AL, Avinash G (1990) Asynchronous neural activity recorded from the round window. J Acoust Soc Am 87:2621–2627
Duckert LG (1983) Morphological changes in the normal and neomycin-perfused guinea pig cochlea following chronic prosthetic implantation. Laryngoscope 93:841–855
Duckert LG, Miller JM (1982) Acute morphological changes in guinea pig cochlea following electrical stimulation. A preliminary scanning electron microscope study. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 91:33–40
Eshraghi AA, Polak M, He J, Telischi FF, Balkany TJ, Van De Water TR (2005) Pattern of hearing loss in a rat model of cochlear implantation trauma. Otol Neurotol 26:442–447
Galvin JJ III, Fu Q-J (2005) Effects of stimulation rate, mode and level on modulation detection by cochlear implant users. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 6:269–279
Gantz BJ, Turner CW (2003) Combining acoustic and electrical hearing. Laryngoscope 113:1726–1730
Green SH, Altschuler RA, Miller JM (2008) Cell death and cochlear protection. In: Schacht J, Popper AN, Fay RR (eds) Auditory trauma, protection and repair. Springer, New York, pp 275–320
Gstoettner WK, Helbig S, Maier N, Kiefer J, Radeloff A, Adunka OF (2006) Ipsilateral electric acoustic stimulation of the auditory system: results of long-term hearing preservation. Audiol Neurootol 11(Suppl. 1):49–56
Haenggeli A, Zhang JS, Vischer MW, Pelizzone M, Rouiller EM (1998) Electrically evoked compound action potential (ECAP) of the cochlear nerve in response to pulsatile electrical stimulation of the cochlea in the rat: effects of stimulation at high rates. Audiology 37:353–371
Hu N, Abbas PJ, Miller CA, Robinson BK, Nourski KV, Jeng FC, Abkes BA, Nichols JM (2003) Auditory response to intracochlear electric stimuli following furosemide treatment. Hear Res 185:77–89
James C, Albegger K, Battmer R, Burdo S, Deggouj N, Deguine O, Dillier N, Gersdorff M, Laszig R, Lenarz T, Rodriguez MM, Mondain M, Offeciers E, Macias AR, Ramsden R, Sterkers O, Von Wallenberg E, Weber B, Fraysse B (2005) Preservation of residual hearing with cochlear implantation: how and why. Acta Otolaryngol 125:481–491
Kanzaki S, Stover T, Kawamoto K, Prieskorn DM, Altschuler RA, Miller JM, Raphael Y (2002) Glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor and chronic electrical stimulation prevent VIII cranial nerve degeneration following denervation. J Comp Neurol 454:350–360
Kiefer J, Pok M, Adunka O, Sturzebecher E, Baumgartner W, Schmidt M, Tillein J, Ye Q, Gstoettner W (2005) Combined electric and acoustic stimulation of the auditory system: results of a clinical study. Audiol Neurootol 10:134–144
Kim YH, Raphael Y (2007) Cell division and maintenance of epithelial integrity in the deafened auditory epithelium. Cell Cycle 6(5):612–619
Le Prell CG, Kawamoto K, Raphael Y, Dolan DF (2006) Electromotile hearing: acoustic tones mask psychophysical response to high-frequency electrical stimulation of intact guinea pig cochleae. J Acoust Soc Am 120:3889–3900
Matsuoka AJ, Abbas PJ, Rubinstein JT, Miller CA (2000) The neuronal response to electrical constant-amplitude pulse train stimulation: additive Gaussian noise. Hear Res 149:129–137
McAnally KI, Clark GM, Syka J (1993) Hair cell mediated responses of the auditory nerve to sinusoidal electrical stimulation of the cochlea in the cat. Hear Res 67:55–68
Middlebrooks JC (2004) Effects of cochlear-implant pulse rate and inter-channel timing on channel interactions and thresholds. J Acoust Soc Am 116:452–468
Middlebrooks JC, Snyder RL (2007) Auditory prosthesis with a penetrating nerve array. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 8:258–279
Miller AL, Morris DJ, Pfingst BE (2000) Effects of time after deafening and implantation on guinea pig electrical detection thresholds. Hear Res 144:175–186
Miller CA, Abbas PJ, Robinson BK (2001) Response properties of the refractory auditory nerve fiber. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2:216–232
Miller CA, Abbas PJ, Robinson BK, Nourski KV, Zhang F, Jeng FC (2006) Electrical excitation of the acoustically sensitive auditory nerve: single-fiber responses to electric pulse trains. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 7:195–210
Moxon EC (1971) Neural and mechanical responses to electric stimulation of the cat’s inner ear. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA
Newbold C, Richardson R, Huang CQ, Milojevic D, Cowan R, Shepherd R (2004) An in vitro model for investigating impedance changes with cell growth and electrical stimulation: implications for cochlear implants. J Neural Eng 1:218–227
Ni D, Shepherd RK, Seldon HL, Xu SA, Clark GM, Millard RE (1992) Cochlear pathology following chronic electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve. I: normal hearing kittens. Hear Res 62:63–81
Nuttall AL, Ren T (1995) Electromotile hearing: evidence from basilar membrane motion and otoacoustic emissions. Hear Res 92:170–177
Nuttall AL, Marques DM, Lawrence M (1977) Effects of perilymphatic perfusion with neomycin on the cochlear microphonic potential in the guinea pig. Acta Otolaryngol 83:393–400
Parkins CW, Colombo J (1987) Auditory-nerve single-neuron thresholds to electrical stimulation from scala tympani electrodes. Hear Res 31:267–285
Pfingst BE (1990) Changes over time in thresholds for electrical stimulation of the cochlea. Hear Res 50:225–236
Pfingst BE, Colesa DJ (2003) Some effects of electrode location on cochlear implant function. Assoc Res Otolaryngol Abs 26:59–60
Pfingst BE, Sutton D (1983) Relation of cochlear implant function to histopathology in monkeys. Ann N Y Acad Sci 405:224–239
Pfingst BE, Xu L, Thompson CS (2007) Effects of carrier pulse rate and stimulation site on modulation detection by subjects with cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am 121:2236–2246
Prado-Guitierrez P, Fewster LM, Heasman JM, McKay CM, Shepherd RK (2006) Effect of interphase gap and pulse duration on electrically evoked potentials is correlated with auditory nerve survival. Hear Res 215:47–55
Rice WR (1989) Analyzing tables of statistical tests. Evolution 43:223–225
Searchfield GD, Munoz DJ, Thorne PR (2004) Ensemble spontaneous activity in the guinea-pig cochlear nerve. Hear Res 192:23–35
Sewell WF (1984) The relation between the endocochlear potential and spontaneous activity in auditory nerve fibres of the cat. J Physiol 347:685–696
Shepherd RK, Javel E (1997) Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve. I. Correlation of physiological responses with cochlear status. Hear Res 108:112–144
Shepherd RK, Hardie NA, Baxi JH (2001) Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve: single neuron strength-duration functions in deafened animals. Ann Biomed Eng 29:195–201
Spoendlin H (1984) Factors inducing retrograde degeneration of the cochlear nerve. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl 112:76–82
Stevens SS, Jones RC (1939) The mechanism of hearing by electrical stimulation. J Acoust Soc Am 10:261–269
Stollwerck LE, Goodrum-Clarke K, Lynch C, Armstrong-Bednall G, Nunn T, Markoff L et al (2001) Speech processing strategy preferences among 55 European CLARION cochlear implant users. Scand Audiol Suppl 52:36–38
Su GL, Colesa DJ, Pfingst BE (2008) Effects of deafening and cochlear implantation procedures on postimplantation psychophysical electrical detection thresholds. Hear Res 241:64–72
Turner CW, Reiss LA, Gantz BJ (2008) Combined acoustic and electric hearing: preserving residual acoustic hearing. Hear Res 242:164–171
van den Honert C, Stypulkowski PH (1984) Physiological properties of the electrically stimulated auditory nerve. II. Single fiber recordings. Hear Res 14:225–243
Vischer M, Haenggeli A, Zhang J, Pelizzone M, Hausler R, Rouiller EM (1997) Effect of high-frequency electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve in an animal model of cochlear implants. Am J Otol 18:S27–S29
von Ilberg C, Kiefer J, Tillein J, Pfenningdorff T, Hartmann R, Sturzebecher E, Klinke R (1999) Electric-acoustic stimulation of the auditory system. New technology for severe hearing loss. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec 61:334–340
Walsh SM, Leake-Jones PA, Vurek LS, Merzenich MM (1981) Chronic electrical stimulation with intracochlear electrodes: electrophysiological results. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl 90:27–29
Webster M, Webster DB (1981) Spiral ganglion neuron loss following organ of Corti loss: a quantitative study. Brain Res 212:17–30
Wilson BS (1997) The future of cochlear implants. Br J Audiol 31:205–225
Wilson BS, Dorman MF (2008) Cochlear implants: a remarkable past and a brilliant future. Hear Res 242:3–21
Wilson BS, Finley CC, Lawson DT, Zerbi M (1997) Temporal representations with cochlear implants. Am J Otol 18:S30–S34
Xu J, Shepherd RK, Millard RE, Clark GM (1997) Chronic electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve at high stimulus rates: a physiological and histopathological study. Hear Res 105:1–29
Xu L, Zwolan TA, Thompson CS, Pfingst BE (2005) Efficacy of a cochlear implant simultaneous analog stimulation strategy coupled with a monopolar electrode configuration. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 114:886–893
Yagi M, Kanzaki S, Kawamoto K, Shin B, Shah PP, Magal E, Sheng J, Raphael Y (2000) Spiral ganglion neurons are protected from degeneration by GDNF gene therapy. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 1:315–325
Zwolan T, Kileny PR, Smith S, Mills D, Koch D, Osberger MJ (2001) Adult cochlear implant patient performance with evolving electrode technology. Otol Neurotol 22:844–849