Most cochlear implant strategies utilize monopolar stimulation, likely inducing relatively broad activation of the auditory neurons. The spread of activity may be narrowed with a tripolar stimulation scheme, wherein compensating current of opposite polarity is simultaneously delivered to two adjacent electrodes. In this study, a model and cochlear implant subjects were used to examine loudness growth for varying amounts of tripolar compensation, parameterized by a coefficient sigma, ranging from 0 (monopolar) to 1 (full tripolar). In both the model and the subjects, current required for threshold activation could be approximated by I(sigma)=Ithr(0)(1-sigmaK), with fitted constants Ithr(0) and K. Three of the subjects had a "positioner," intended to place their electrode arrays closer to their neural tissue. The values of K were smaller for the positioner users and for a "close" electrode-to-tissue distance in the model. Above threshold, equal-loudness contours for some subjects deviated significantly from a linear scale-up of the threshold approximations. The patterns of deviation were similar to those observed in the model for conditions in which most of the neurons near the center electrode were excited.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.2749414 | DOI Listing |
JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg
January 2025
Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Importance: There is a lack of high level of evidence studies comparing the effect of different treatment options for single-sided deafness (SSD).
Objective: To determine the effect of a cochlear implant (CI), bone conduction device (BCD), contralateral routing of signals hearing aid (CROS), and no treatment on speech perception in noise outcomes in patients with SSD.
Design, Setting, And Participants: In this single-center randomized clinical trial, adult patients with SSD were randomized into 3 groups: CI; a trial period with first a BCD on a headband and then a CROS; or a trial period with first a CROS and then a BCD on a headband.
Trends Hear
January 2025
Department of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
When listening to speech under adverse conditions, listeners compensate using neurocognitive resources. A clinically relevant form of adverse listening is listening through a cochlear implant (CI), which provides a spectrally degraded signal. CI listening is often simulated through noise-vocoding.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFActa Otolaryngol
January 2025
Neuro-Otology, Department of Neurosurgery, SGPGIMS, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Background: Pediatric cochlear implant (CI) recipients with cochlear malformations face challenges due to variable speech recognition outcomes.
Aims/objectives: This study assesses the predictive value of intraoperative electrically evoked compound action potential (eCAP) thresholds, residual hearing, age at implantation, Intelligent Quotient (IQ), and malformation type for speech recognition outcomes.
Material And Methods: A prospective cohort of 52 children (aged 1-4 years) with cochlear malformations who underwent CI between 2016 and 2024 was analyzed.
Brain Commun
January 2025
Centre for Cognitive Neuroscience, University of Salzburg, 5020 Salzburg, Austria.
Former studies have established that individuals with a cochlear implant (CI) for treating single-sided deafness experience improved speech processing after implantation. However, it is not clear how each ear contributes separately to improve speech perception over time at the behavioural and neural level. In this longitudinal EEG study with four different time points, we measured neural activity in response to various temporally and spectrally degraded spoken words presented monaurally to the CI and non-CI ears (5 left and 5 right ears) in 10 single-sided CI users and 10 age- and sex-matched individuals with normal hearing.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEar Hear
January 2025
Department of Otolaryngology/Head & Neck Surgery, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Objectives: This study was designed to (1) compare preactivation and postactivation performance with a cochlear implant for children with functional preoperative low-frequency hearing, (2) compare outcomes of electric-acoustic stimulation (EAS) versus electric-only stimulation (ES) for children with versus without hearing preservation to understand the benefits of low-frequency acoustic cues, and (3) to investigate the relationship between postoperative acoustic hearing thresholds and performance.
Design: This was a prospective, 12-month between-subjects trial including 24 pediatric cochlear implant recipients with preoperative low-frequency functional hearing. Participant ages ranged from 5 to 17 years old.
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!