Top

Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology

Published in:

Open Access 04-11-2022 | Cochlear Implant | Research Article

A Computational Model of a Single Auditory Nerve Fiber for Electric-Acoustic Stimulation

Authors: Daniel Kipping, Waldo Nogueira

Published in: Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology | Issue 6/2022

Abstract

Cochlear implant (CI) recipients with preserved acoustic low-frequency hearing in the implanted ear are a growing group among traditional CI users who benefit from hybrid electric-acoustic stimulation (EAS). However, combined ipsilateral electric and acoustic stimulation also introduces interactions between the two modalities that can affect the performance of EAS users. A computational model of a single auditory nerve fiber that is excited by EAS was developed to study the interaction between electric and acoustic stimulation. Two existing models of sole electric or acoustic stimulation were coupled to simulate responses to combined EAS. Different methods of combining both models were implemented. In the coupled model variant, the refractoriness of the simulated fiber leads to suppressive interaction between electrically evoked and acoustically evoked spikes as well as spontaneous activity. The second model variant is an uncoupled EAS model without electric-acoustic interaction. By comparing predictions between the coupled and the noninteracting EAS model, it was possible to infer electric-acoustic interaction at the level of the auditory nerve. The EAS model was used to simulate fiber populations with realistic inter-unit variability, where each unit was represented by the single-fiber model. Predicted thresholds and dynamic ranges, spike rates, latencies, jitter, and vector strengths were compared to empirical data. The presented EAS model provides a framework for future studies of peripheral electric-acoustic interaction.

Available only for authorised users

Gantz BJ, Turner CW (2010) Combining acoustic and electrical hearing. Laryngoscope 113:1726–1730. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005537-200310000-00012CrossRef

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 Neurotol 11:49–56. https://doi.org/10.1159/000095614CrossRef

von Ilberg C, Kiefer J, Tillein J, Pfenningdorff T, Hartmann R, Stürzebecher E, Klinke R (1999) Electric-acoustic stimulation of the auditory system. ORL 61:334–340. https://doi.org/10.1159/000027695CrossRef

Wilson BS (2015) Getting a decent (but sparse) signal to the brain for users of cochlear implants. Hear Res 322:24–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2014.11.009CrossRef

Lenarz T, James C, Cuda D, Fitzgerald O’Connor A, Frachet B, Frijns JHM, Klenzner T, Laszig R, Manrique M, Marx M, Merkus P, Mylanus EAM, Offeciers E, Pesch J, Ramos-Macias A, Robier A, Sterkers O, Uziel A (2013) European multi-centre study of the Nucleus Hybrid L24 cochlear implant. Int J Audiol 52:838–848. https://doi.org/10.3109/14992027.2013.802032CrossRef

Lenarz T, Stöver T, Buechner A, Lesinski-Schiedat A, Patrick J, Pesch J (2009) Hearing conservation surgery using the Hybrid-L electrode. Audiol Neurotol 14:22–31. https://doi.org/10.1159/000206492CrossRef

Büchner A, Schüssler M, Battmer R-D, Stöver T, Lesinski-Schiedat A, Lenarz T (2009) Impact of low-frequency hearing. Audiol Neurotol 14:8–13. https://doi.org/10.1159/000206490CrossRef

Incerti PV, Ching TYC, Cowan RSC (2013) A systematic review of electric-acoustic stimulation: device fitting ranges, outcomes, and clinical fitting practices. Trends Amplif 17:3–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/1084713813480857CrossRef

Kiefer J, Pok M, Adunka OF, Stürzebecher E, Baumgartner W, Schmidt M, Tillein J, Ye Q, Gstoettner WK (2005) Combined electric and acoustic stimulation of the auditory system: results of a clinical study. Audiol Neurotol 10:134–144. https://doi.org/10.1159/000084023CrossRef

10.

Turner CW, Gantz BJ, Vidal C, Behrens A, Henry BA (2004) Speech recognition in noise for cochlear implant listeners: benefits of residual acoustic hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 115:1729–1735. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1687425CrossRef

11.

Imsiecke M, Krüger B, Büchner A, Lenarz T, Nogueira W (2020) Interaction between electric and acoustic stimulation influences speech perception in ipsilateral EAS users. Ear Hear 41:868–882. https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000000807CrossRef

12.

Kipping D, Krüger B, Nogueira W (2020) The role of electroneural versus electrophonic stimulation on psychoacoustic electric-acoustic masking in cochlear implant users with residual hearing. Hear Res 395:108036. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2020.108036CrossRef

13.

Koka K, Litvak LM (2017) Feasibility of using electrocochleography for objective estimation of electro-acoustic interactions in cochlear implant recipients with residual hearing. Front Neurosci 11:1–9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2017.00337CrossRef

14.

Krüger B, Büchner A, Nogueira W (2017) Simultaneous masking between electric and acoustic stimulation in cochlear implant users with residual low-frequency hearing. Hear Res 353:185–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2017.06.014CrossRef

15.

Lin P, Turner CW, Gantz BJ, Djalilian HR, Zeng F-G (2011) Ipsilateral masking between acoustic and electric stimulations. J Acoust Soc Am 130:858–865. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.3605294CrossRef

16.

Imsiecke M, Krüger B, Büchner A, Lenarz T, Nogueira W (2018) Electric-acoustic forward masking in cochlear implant users with ipsilateral residual hearing. Hear Res 364:25–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2018.04.003CrossRef

17.

Imsiecke M, Büchner A, Lenarz T, Nogueira W (2020) Psychoacoustic and electrophysiological electric-acoustic interaction effects in cochlear implant users with ipsilateral residual hearing. Hear Res 386:107873. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2019.107873CrossRef

18.

Koka K, Saoji AA, Litvak LM (2017) Electrocochleography in cochlear implant recipients with residual hearing. Ear Hear 38:e161–e167. https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000000385CrossRef

19.

Krüger B, Büchner A, Lenarz T, Nogueira W (2020) Electric-acoustic interaction measurements in cochlear-implant users with ipsilateral residual hearing using electrocochleography. J Acoust Soc Am 147:350–363. https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0000577CrossRef

20.

Krüger B, Büchner A, Lenarz T, Nogueira W (2020) Amplitude growth of intracochlear electrocochleography in cochlear implant users with residual hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 147:1147–1162. https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0000744CrossRef

21.

Miller CA, Abbas PJ, Robinson BK, Nourski KV, Zhang F, Jeng F-C (2009) Auditory nerve fiber responses to combined acoustic and electric stimulation. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 10:425–445. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-008-0154-7CrossRef

22.

Tillein J, Hartmann R, Kral A (2015) Electric-acoustic interactions in the hearing cochlea: single fiber recordings. Hear Res 322:112–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2014.09.011CrossRef

23.

Nourski KV, Abbas PJ, Miller CA, Robinson BK, Jeng F-C (2007) Acoustic–electric interactions in the guinea pig auditory nerve: simultaneous and forward masking of the electrically evoked compound action potential. Hear Res 232:87–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2007.07.001CrossRef

24.

Nourski KV, Abbas PJ, Miller CA, Robinson BK, Jeng F-C (2005) Effects of acoustic noise on the auditory nerve compound action potentials evoked by electric pulse trains. Hear Res 202:141–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2004.10.001CrossRef

25.

Stronks HC, Prijs VF, Chimona TS, Grolman W, Klis SFL (2012) Spatial overlap of combined electroacoustic stimulation determines the electrically evoked response in the guinea pig cochlea. Otol Neurotol 33:1535–1542. https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0b013e318271c0b6CrossRef

26.

Stronks HC, Versnel H, Prijs VF, Klis SFL (2010) Suppression of the acoustically evoked auditory-nerve response by electrical stimulation in the cochlea of the guinea pig. Hear Res 259:64–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2009.10.004CrossRef

27.

Clark GM, Mcanally KI, Black RC, Shepherd RK (1995) Electrical stimulation of residual hearing in the implanted cochlea. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 104:111–113

28.

Fráter A (2019) Effects of electrical stimulation by cochlear implants on residual hearing. University College London

29.

McAnally KI, Brown M, Clark GM (1997) Estimating mechanical responses to pulsatile electrical stimulation of the cochlea. Hear Res 106:146–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-5955(97)00012-9CrossRef

30.

McAnally KI, Clark GM (1994) Stimulation of residual hearing in the cat by pulsatile electrical stimulation of the cochlea. Acta Otolaryngol 114:366–372. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016489409126071CrossRef

31.

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. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-5955(93)90232-PCrossRef

32.

Stronks HC, Versnel H, Prijs VF, De Groot JCMJ, Grolman W, Klis SFL (2013) The role of electrophonics in electroacoustic stimulation of the guinea pig cochlea. Otol Neurotol 34:579–587. https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0b013e318280db5aCrossRef

33.

Sato M, Baumhoff P, Kral A (2016) Cochlear implant stimulation of a hearing ear generates separate electrophonic and electroneural responses. J Neurosci 36:54–64. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2968-15.2016CrossRef

34.

Sato M, Baumhoff P, Tillein J, Kral A (2017) Physiological mechanisms in combined electric-acoustic stimulation. Otol Neurotol 38:e215–e223. https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000001428CrossRef

35.

Bruce IC, Erfani Y, Zilany MSA (2018) A phenomenological model of the synapse between the inner hair cell and auditory nerve: implications of limited neurotransmitter release sites. Hear Res 360:40–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2017.12.016CrossRef

36.

Meddis R (2006) Auditory-nerve first-spike latency and auditory absolute threshold: a computer model. J Acoust Soc Am 119:406–417. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2139628CrossRef

37.

Verhulst S, Altoè A, Vasilkov V (2018) Computational modeling of the human auditory periphery: auditory-nerve responses, evoked potentials and hearing loss. Hear Res 360:55–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2017.12.018CrossRef

38.

Bruce IC, Irlicht LS, White MW, O’Leary SJ, Dynes S, Javel E, Clark GM (1999) A stochastic model of the electrically stimulated auditory nerve: single-pulse response. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 46:617–629CrossRef

39.

Bruce IC, Irlicht LS, White MW, O’Leary SJ, Dynes S, Javel E, Clark GM (1999) A stochastic model of the electrically stimulated auditory nerve: pulse-train response. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 46:630–637CrossRef

40.

Goldwyn JH, Rubinstein JT, Shea-Brown E (2012) A point process framework for modeling electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve. J Neurophysiol 108:1430–1452. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00095.2012CrossRef

41.

Horne CDF, Sumner CJ, Seeber BU (2016) A phenomenological model of the electrically stimulated auditory nerve fiber: temporal and biphasic response properties. Front Comput Neurosci 10:1–17. https://doi.org/10.3389/fncom.2016.00008CrossRef

42.

Joshi SN, Dau T, Epp B (2017) A model of electrically stimulated auditory nerve fiber responses with peripheral and central sites of spike generation. JARO - J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 18:323–342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-016-0608-2CrossRef

43.

Negm MH, Bruce IC (2014) The effects of HCN and KLT ion channels on adaptation and refractoriness in a stochastic auditory nerve model. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 61:2749–2759. https://doi.org/10.1109/TBME.2014.2327055CrossRef

44.

Bourien J, Tang Y, Batrel C, Huet A, Lenoir M, Ladrech S, Desmadryl G, Nouvian R, Puel J-LL, Wang J (2014) Contribution of auditory nerve fibers to compound action potential of the auditory nerve. J Neurophysiol 112:1025–1039. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00738.2013CrossRef

45.

Briaire JJ, Frijns JHM (2005) Unraveling the electrically evoked compound action potential. Hear Res 205:143–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2005.03.020CrossRef

46.

Frijns JHM, Schoonhoven R, Grote JJ (1996) The influence of stimulus intensity on spike timing and the compound action potential in the electrically stimulated cochlea: a model study, in: Proceedings of 18th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE, pp 327–328. https://doi.org/10.1109/IEMBS.1996.656976

47.

Miller CA, Abbas PJ, Rubinstein JT (1999) An empirically based model of the electrically evoked compound action potential. Hear Res 135:1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-5955(99)00081-7CrossRef

48.

Brughera A, Mikiel-Hunter J, Dietz M, McAlpine D (2021) Auditory brainstem models: adapting cochlear nuclei improve spatial encoding by the medial superior olive in reverberation. JARO - J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 22:289–318. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-021-00797-0CrossRef

49.

Klug J, Schmors L, Ashida G, Dietz M (2020) Neural rate difference model can account for lateralization of high-frequency stimuli. J Acoust Soc Am 148:678–691. https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0001602CrossRef

50.

Nelson PC, Carney LH (2004) A phenomenological model of peripheral and central neural responses to amplitude-modulated tones. J Acoust Soc Am 116:2173–2186. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1784442CrossRef

51.

Salimi N, Zilany MSA, Carney LH (2017) Modeling responses in the superior paraolivary nucleus: implications for forward masking in the inferior colliculus. JARO - J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 18:441–456. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-016-0612-6CrossRef

52.

Moxon EC (1971) Neural and mechanical responses to electric stimulation of the cat’s inner ear. Massachusetts Institute of Technology

53.

van den Honert C, Stypulkowski PH (1984) Physiological properties of the electrically stimulated auditory nerve. II Single fiber recordings Hear Res 14:225–243. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-5955(84)90052-2CrossRef

54.

Liberman MC, Kiang NYS (1978) Acoustic trauma in cats: cochlear pathology and auditory nerve activity. Acta Otolaryngol 86:1–63. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016487809127891CrossRef

55.

Miller CA, Abbas PJ, Robinson BK, Rubinstein JT, Matsuoka AJ (1999) Electrically evoked single-fiber action potentials from cat: responses to monopolar, monophasic stimulation. Hear Res 130:197–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-5955(99)00012-XCrossRef

56.

Dynes SBC (1996) Discharge characteristics of auditory nerve fibers for pulsatile electrical stimuli. Massachusetts Institute of Technology

57.

Miller CA, Robinson BK, Rubinstein JT, Abbas PJ, Runge-Samuelson CL (2001) Auditory nerve responses to monophasic and biphasic electric stimuli. Hear Res 151:79–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-2977(00)00082-6CrossRef

58.

Miller CA, Abbas PJ, Robinson BK, Nourski KV, Zhang F, Jeng F-C (2006) Electrical excitation of the acoustically sensitive auditory nerve: single-fiber responses to electric pulse trains. JARO - J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 7:195–210. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-006-0036-9CrossRef

59.

van Hemmen JL (2013) Vector strength after Goldberg, Brown, and von Mises: biological and mathematical perspectives. Biol Cybern 107:385–396. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00422-013-0561-7CrossRef

60.

June L, Young ED (1993) Discharge-rate dependence of refractory behavior of cat auditory-nerve fibers. Hear Res 69:151–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-5955(93)90103-8CrossRef

61.

Miller CA, Abbas PJ, Robinson BK (2001) Response properties of the refractory auditory nerve fiber. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2:216–232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s101620010083CrossRef

62.

Hu N, Abbas PJ, Miller CA, Robinson BK, Nourski KV, Jeng F-C, Abkes BA, Nichols JM (2003) Auditory response to intracochlear electric stimuli following furosemide treatment. Hear Res 185:77–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-5955(03)00261-2CrossRef

63.

Sato M, Kral A (2020) Dynamic range of cochlear implant stimulation is larger in residually hearing cochlea. Acoust Sci Technol 41:380–381. https://doi.org/10.1250/ast.41.380CrossRef

64.

Lusted HS, Simmons FB (1988) Comparison of electrophonic and auditory-nerve electroneural responses. J Acoust Soc Am 83:657–661. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.396160CrossRef

65.

Javel E, Shepherd RK (2000) Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve. Hear Res 140:45–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-5955(99)00186-0CrossRef

66.

Bai S, Encke J, Obando-Leitón M, Weiß R, Schäfer F, Eberharter J, Böhnke F, Hemmert W (2019) Electrical stimulation in the human cochlea: a computational study based on high-resolution micro-CT scans. Front Neurosci 13:1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2019.01312CrossRef

67.

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 315:10–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2014.06.003CrossRef

68.

Malherbe TK, Hanekom T, Hanekom JJ (2016) Constructing a three-dimensional electrical model of a living cochlear implant user’s cochlea. Int J Numer Method Biomed Eng 32:e02751. https://doi.org/10.1002/cnm.2751CrossRef

69.

Nogueira W, Schurzig D, Büchner A, Penninger RT, Würfel W (2016) Validation of a cochlear implant patient-specific model of the voltage distribution in a clinical setting. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 4:1–16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2016.00084CrossRef

70.

Rattay F, Leao RN, Felix H (2001) A model of the electrically excited human cochlear neuron II. Influence of the three-dimensional cochlear structure on neural excitability. Hear Res 153:64–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-5955(00)00257-4CrossRef

71.

Rattay F (1989) Analysis of models for extracellular fiber stimulation. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 36:676–682. https://doi.org/10.1109/10.32099CrossRef

72.

Nourski KV (2007) Acoustic-electric interactions in the auditory nerve: simultaneous and forward masking of the electrically evoked compound action potential. PhD Thesis. University of Iowa

73.

van Gendt MJ, Koka K, Kalkman RK, Stronks HC, Briaire JJ, Litvak L, Frijns JHM (2020) Simulating intracochlear electrocochleography with a combined model of acoustic hearing and electric current spread in the cochlea. J Acoust Soc Am 147:2049–2060. https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0000948CrossRef

74.

Schroeder MR, Hall JL (1974) Model for mechanical to neural transduction in the auditory receptor. J Acoust Soc Am 55:1055–1060. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1914647CrossRef

Title: A Computational Model of a Single Auditory Nerve Fiber for Electric-Acoustic Stimulation
Authors: Daniel Kipping
Waldo Nogueira
Publication date: 04-11-2022
Publisher: Springer US
Keyword: Cochlear Implant
Published in: Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology / Issue 6/2022
Print ISSN: 1525-3961
Electronic ISSN: 1438-7573
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-022-00870-2

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

A Computational Model of a Single Auditory Nerve Fiber for Electric-Acoustic Stimulation

Abstract

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 6/2022

Computer Simulation of the Electrical Stimulation of the Human Vestibular System: Effects of the Reactive Component of Impedance on Voltage Waveform and Nerve Selectivity

Editorial: JARO is Getting a Face-lift - More Formats, More Associate Editors, More Science, More ARO

Expression and Neurotransmitter Association of the Synaptic Calcium Sensor Synaptotagmin in the Avian Auditory Brain Stem

Variability in the Estimated Amplitude of Vowel-Evoked Envelope Following Responses Caused by Assumed Neurophysiologic Processing Delays

Rate Discrimination Training May Partially Restore Temporal Processing Abilities from Age-Related Deficits

Changes in the Electrically Evoked Compound Action Potential over time After Implantation and Subsequent Deafening in Guinea Pigs