Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology 4/2019

Open Access 01-08-2019 | Cochlear Implant | Research Article

A Site-Selection Strategy Based on Polarity Sensitivity for Cochlear Implants: Effects on Spectro-Temporal Resolution and Speech Perception

Authors: Tobias Goehring, Alan Archer-Boyd, John M. Deeks, Julie G. Arenberg, Robert P. Carlyon

Published in: Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology | Issue 4/2019

Login to get access

ABSTRACT

Thresholds of asymmetric pulses presented to cochlear implant (CI) listeners depend on polarity in a way that differs across subjects and electrodes. It has been suggested that lower thresholds for cathodic-dominant compared to anodic-dominant pulses reflect good local neural health. We evaluated the hypothesis that this polarity effect (PE) can be used in a site-selection strategy to improve speech perception and spectro-temporal resolution. Detection thresholds were measured in eight users of Advanced Bionics CIs for 80-pps, triphasic, monopolar pulse trains where the central high-amplitude phase was either anodic or cathodic. Two experimental MAPs were then generated for each subject by deactivating the five electrodes with either the highest or the lowest PE magnitudes (cathodic minus anodic threshold). Performance with the two experimental MAPs was evaluated using two spectro-temporal tests (Spectro-Temporal Ripple for Investigating Processor EffectivenesS (STRIPES; Archer-Boyd et al. in J Acoust Soc Am 144:2983–2997, 2018) and Spectral-Temporally Modulated Ripple Test (SMRT; Aronoff and Landsberger in J Acoust Soc Am 134:EL217–EL222, 2013)) and with speech recognition in quiet and in noise. Performance was also measured with an experimental MAP that used all electrodes, similar to the subjects’ clinical MAP. The PE varied strongly across subjects and electrodes, with substantial magnitudes relative to the electrical dynamic range. There were no significant differences in performance between the three MAPs at group level, but there were significant effects at subject level—not all of which were in the hypothesized direction—consistent with previous reports of a large variability in CI users’ performance and in the potential benefit of site-selection strategies. The STRIPES but not the SMRT test successfully predicted which strategy produced the best speech-in-noise performance on a subject-by-subject basis. The average PE across electrodes correlated significantly with subject age, duration of deafness, and speech perception scores, consistent with a relationship between PE and neural health. These findings motivate further investigations into site-specific measures of neural health and their application to CI processing strategies.
Literature
go back to reference Archer-Boyd AW, Southwell RV, Deeks JM et al (2018) Development and validation of a spectro-temporal processing test for cochlear-implant listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 144:2983–2997CrossRefPubMed Archer-Boyd AW, Southwell RV, Deeks JM et al (2018) Development and validation of a spectro-temporal processing test for cochlear-implant listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 144:2983–2997CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Bench J, Kowal Å, Bamford J (1979) The BKB (Bamford-Kowal-Bench) sentence lists for partially-hearing children. Br J Audiol 13:108–112CrossRefPubMed Bench J, Kowal Å, Bamford J (1979) The BKB (Bamford-Kowal-Bench) sentence lists for partially-hearing children. Br J Audiol 13:108–112CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Bierer JA, Faulkner KF (2010) Identifying cochlear implant channels with poor electrode-neuron interface: partial tripolar, single-channel thresholds and psychophysical tuning curves. Ear Hear 31:247CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Bierer JA, Faulkner KF (2010) Identifying cochlear implant channels with poor electrode-neuron interface: partial tripolar, single-channel thresholds and psychophysical tuning curves. Ear Hear 31:247CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Bierer JA, Litvak L (2016) Reducing channel interaction through cochlear implant programming may improve speech perception: current focusing and channel deactivation. Trends Hear 20:2331216516653389PubMedPubMedCentral Bierer JA, Litvak L (2016) Reducing channel interaction through cochlear implant programming may improve speech perception: current focusing and channel deactivation. Trends Hear 20:2331216516653389PubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Bierer JA, Deeks JM, Billig AJ, Carlyon RP (2015b) Comparison of signal and gap-detection thresholds for focused and broad cochlear implant electrode configurations. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 16:273–284CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Bierer JA, Deeks JM, Billig AJ, Carlyon RP (2015b) Comparison of signal and gap-detection thresholds for focused and broad cochlear implant electrode configurations. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 16:273–284CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Carlyon RP, Cosentino S, Deeks JM et al (2018) Effect of stimulus polarity on detection thresholds in cochlear implant users: relationships with average threshold, gap detection, and rate discrimination. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol:1–9 Carlyon RP, Cosentino S, Deeks JM et al (2018) Effect of stimulus polarity on detection thresholds in cochlear implant users: relationships with average threshold, gap detection, and rate discrimination. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol:1–9
go back to reference Cosentino S, Carlyon RP, Deeks JM et al (2016) Rate discrimination, gap detection and ranking of temporal pitch in cochlear implant users. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 17:371–382CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Cosentino S, Carlyon RP, Deeks JM et al (2016) Rate discrimination, gap detection and ranking of temporal pitch in cochlear implant users. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 17:371–382CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Croghan NBH, Duran SI, Smith ZM (2017) Re-examining the relationship between number of cochlear implant channels and maximal speech intelligibility. J Acoust Soc Am 142:EL537–EL543CrossRefPubMed Croghan NBH, Duran SI, Smith ZM (2017) Re-examining the relationship between number of cochlear implant channels and maximal speech intelligibility. J Acoust Soc Am 142:EL537–EL543CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Cullington HE, Zeng F-G (2008) Speech recognition with varying numbers and types of competing talkers by normal-hearing, cochlear-implant, and implant simulation subjects. J Acoust Soc Am 123:450–461CrossRefPubMed Cullington HE, Zeng F-G (2008) Speech recognition with varying numbers and types of competing talkers by normal-hearing, cochlear-implant, and implant simulation subjects. J Acoust Soc Am 123:450–461CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Davis MH, Johnsrude IS, Hervais-Adelman A et al (2005) Lexical information drives perceptual learning of distorted speech: evidence from the comprehension of noise-vocoded sentences. J Exp Psychol Gen 134:222CrossRefPubMed Davis MH, Johnsrude IS, Hervais-Adelman A et al (2005) Lexical information drives perceptual learning of distorted speech: evidence from the comprehension of noise-vocoded sentences. J Exp Psychol Gen 134:222CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Dawson PW, Mauger SJ, Hersbach AA (2011) Clinical evaluation of signal-to-noise ratio-based noise reduction in Nucleus® cochlear implant recipients. Ear Hear 32:382–390CrossRefPubMed Dawson PW, Mauger SJ, Hersbach AA (2011) Clinical evaluation of signal-to-noise ratio-based noise reduction in Nucleus® cochlear implant recipients. Ear Hear 32:382–390CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Deeks JM, Carlyon RP (2004) Simulations of cochlear implant hearing using filtered harmonic complexes: implications for concurrent sound segregation. J Acoust Soc Am 115:1736–1746CrossRefPubMed Deeks JM, Carlyon RP (2004) Simulations of cochlear implant hearing using filtered harmonic complexes: implications for concurrent sound segregation. J Acoust Soc Am 115:1736–1746CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference DeVries L, Scheperle R, Bierer JA (2016) Assessing the electrode-neuron interface with the electrically evoked compound action potential, electrode position, and behavioral thresholds. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 17:237–252CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral DeVries L, Scheperle R, Bierer JA (2016) Assessing the electrode-neuron interface with the electrically evoked compound action potential, electrode position, and behavioral thresholds. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 17:237–252CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Dorman MF, Loizou PC, Rainey D (1997) Speech intelligibility as a function of the number of channels of stimulation for signal processors using sine-wave and noise-band outputs. J Acoust Soc Am 102:2403–2411CrossRefPubMed Dorman MF, Loizou PC, Rainey D (1997) Speech intelligibility as a function of the number of channels of stimulation for signal processors using sine-wave and noise-band outputs. J Acoust Soc Am 102:2403–2411CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Fayad JN, Linthicum FH (2006) Multichannel cochlear implants: relation of histopathology to performance. Laryngoscope 116:1310–1320CrossRefPubMed Fayad JN, Linthicum FH (2006) Multichannel cochlear implants: relation of histopathology to performance. Laryngoscope 116:1310–1320CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Fu Q-J, Nogaki G (2005) Noise susceptibility of cochlear implant users: the role of spectral resolution and smearing. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 6:19–27CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Fu Q-J, Nogaki G (2005) Noise susceptibility of cochlear implant users: the role of spectral resolution and smearing. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 6:19–27CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Garnham C, O’driscoll M, Ramsden R, Saeed S (2002) Speech understanding in noise with a Med-El COMBI 40+ cochlear implant using reduced channel sets. Ear Hear 23:540–552CrossRefPubMed Garnham C, O’driscoll M, Ramsden R, Saeed S (2002) Speech understanding in noise with a Med-El COMBI 40+ cochlear implant using reduced channel sets. Ear Hear 23:540–552CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Hartmann R, Topp G, Klinke R (1984) Discharge patterns of cat primary auditory fibers with electrical stimulation of the cochlea. Hear Res 13:47–62CrossRefPubMed Hartmann R, Topp G, Klinke R (1984) Discharge patterns of cat primary auditory fibers with electrical stimulation of the cochlea. Hear Res 13:47–62CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Holden LK, Firszt JB, Reeder RM et al (2016) Factors affecting outcomes in cochlear implant recipients implanted with a perimodiolar electrode array located in scala tympani. Otol Neurotol 37:1662CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Holden LK, Firszt JB, Reeder RM et al (2016) Factors affecting outcomes in cochlear implant recipients implanted with a perimodiolar electrode array located in scala tympani. Otol Neurotol 37:1662CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Hu Y, Loizou PC (2010) Environment-specific noise suppression for improved speech intelligibility by cochlear implant users. J Acoust Soc Am 127:3689–3695CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Hu Y, Loizou PC (2010) Environment-specific noise suppression for improved speech intelligibility by cochlear implant users. J Acoust Soc Am 127:3689–3695CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference 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
go back to reference Hughes ML, Stille LJ (2010) Effect of stimulus and recording parameters on spatial spread of excitation and masking patterns obtained with the electrically evoked compound action potential in cochlear implants. Ear Hear. 31:679–92 Hughes ML, Stille LJ (2010) Effect of stimulus and recording parameters on spatial spread of excitation and masking patterns obtained with the electrically evoked compound action potential in cochlear implants. Ear Hear. 31:679–92
go back to reference Johnsson LG, Hawkins JJ, Kingsley TC et al (1981) Aminoglycoside-induced cochlear pathology in man. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl 383:1–19PubMed Johnsson LG, Hawkins JJ, Kingsley TC et al (1981) Aminoglycoside-induced cochlear pathology in man. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl 383:1–19PubMed
go back to reference Khan AM, Whiten DM, Nadol JB Jr, Eddington DK (2005) Histopathology of human cochlear implants: correlation of psychophysical and anatomical measures. Hear Res 205:83–93CrossRefPubMed Khan AM, Whiten DM, Nadol JB Jr, Eddington DK (2005) Histopathology of human cochlear implants: correlation of psychophysical and anatomical measures. Hear Res 205:83–93CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Lawler M, Yu J, Aronoff JM (2017) Comparison of the spectral-temporally modulated ripple test with the Arizona Biomedical Institute sentence test in cochlear implant users. Ear Hear 38:760–766CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Lawler M, Yu J, Aronoff JM (2017) Comparison of the spectral-temporally modulated ripple test with the Arizona Biomedical Institute sentence test in cochlear implant users. Ear Hear 38:760–766CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Leake PA, Hradek GT (1988) Cochlear pathology of long term neomycin induced deafness in cats. Hear Res 33:11–33CrossRefPubMed Leake PA, Hradek GT (1988) Cochlear pathology of long term neomycin induced deafness in cats. Hear Res 33:11–33CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Long CJ, Holden TA, McClelland GH et al (2014) Examining the electro-neural interface of cochlear implant users using psychophysics, CT scans, and speech understanding. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 15:293–304CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Long CJ, Holden TA, McClelland GH et al (2014) Examining the electro-neural interface of cochlear implant users using psychophysics, CT scans, and speech understanding. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 15:293–304CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Macherey O, Carlyon RP, Van Wieringen A et al (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 et al (2008) Higher sensitivity of human auditory nerve fibers to positive electrical currents. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 9:241–251CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Macherey O, Carlyon RP, Chatron J, Roman S (2017) Effect of pulse polarity on thresholds and on non-monotonic loudness growth in cochlear implant users. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 18:513–527CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Macherey O, Carlyon RP, Chatron J, Roman S (2017) Effect of pulse polarity on thresholds and on non-monotonic loudness growth in cochlear implant users. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 18:513–527CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference MacLeod A, Summerfield Q (1990) A procedure for measuring auditory and audiovisual speech-reception thresholds for sentences in noise: rationale, evaluation, and recommendations for use. Br J Audiol 24:29–43CrossRefPubMed MacLeod A, Summerfield Q (1990) A procedure for measuring auditory and audiovisual speech-reception thresholds for sentences in noise: rationale, evaluation, and recommendations for use. Br J Audiol 24:29–43CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Mathew R, Undurraga J, Li G et al (2017) Objective assessment of electrode discrimination with the auditory change complex in adult cochlear implant users. Hear Res 354:86–101CrossRefPubMed Mathew R, Undurraga J, Li G et al (2017) Objective assessment of electrode discrimination with the auditory change complex in adult cochlear implant users. Hear Res 354:86–101CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Mesnildrey Q (2017) Towards a better understanding of the cochlear implant-auditory nerve interface: from intracochlear electrical recordings to psychophysics. Dissertation. University Aix-Marseille Mesnildrey Q (2017) Towards a better understanding of the cochlear implant-auditory nerve interface: from intracochlear electrical recordings to psychophysics. Dissertation. University Aix-Marseille
go back to reference Miller CA, Abbas PJ, Robinson BK et al (1999) Electrically evoked single-fiber action potentials from cat: responses to monopolar, monophasic stimulation. Hear Res 130:197–218CrossRefPubMed Miller CA, Abbas PJ, Robinson BK et al (1999) Electrically evoked single-fiber action potentials from cat: responses to monopolar, monophasic stimulation. Hear Res 130:197–218CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Miller CA, Abbas PJ, Hay-McCutcheon MJ et al (2004) Intracochlear and extracochlear ECAPs suggest antidromic action potentials. Hear Res 198:75–86CrossRefPubMed Miller CA, Abbas PJ, Hay-McCutcheon MJ et al (2004) Intracochlear and extracochlear ECAPs suggest antidromic action potentials. Hear Res 198:75–86CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Pfingst BE, Xu L, Thompson CS (2004) Across-site threshold variation in cochlear implants: relation to speech recognition. Audiol Neurotol 9:341–352CrossRef Pfingst BE, Xu L, Thompson CS (2004) Across-site threshold variation in cochlear implants: relation to speech recognition. Audiol Neurotol 9:341–352CrossRef
go back to reference Pfingst BE, Zhou N, Colesa DJ et al (2015) Importance of cochlear health for implant function. Hear Res 322:77–88CrossRefPubMed Pfingst BE, Zhou N, Colesa DJ et al (2015) Importance of cochlear health for implant function. Hear Res 322:77–88CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Plant K, Mcdermott H, Van Hoesel R et al (2016) Factors predicting postoperative unilateral and bilateral speech recognition in adult cochlear implant recipients with acoustic hearing. 153–163 Plant K, Mcdermott H, Van Hoesel R et al (2016) Factors predicting postoperative unilateral and bilateral speech recognition in adult cochlear implant recipients with acoustic hearing. 153–163
go back to reference Prado-Guitierrez P, Fewster LM, Heasman JM et al (2006) Effect of interphase gap and pulse duration on electrically evoked potentials is correlated with auditory nerve survival. Hear Res 215:47–55CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Prado-Guitierrez P, Fewster LM, Heasman JM et al (2006) Effect of interphase gap and pulse duration on electrically evoked potentials is correlated with auditory nerve survival. Hear Res 215:47–55CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Ramekers D, Versnel H, Strahl SB et al (2015) Recovery characteristics of the electrically stimulated auditory nerve in deafened guinea pigs: relation to neuronal status. Hear Res 321:12–24CrossRefPubMed Ramekers D, Versnel H, Strahl SB et al (2015) Recovery characteristics of the electrically stimulated auditory nerve in deafened guinea pigs: relation to neuronal status. Hear Res 321:12–24CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Rattay F (1999) The basic mechanism for the electrical stimulation of the nervous system. Neuroscience 89:335–346CrossRefPubMed Rattay F (1999) The basic mechanism for the electrical stimulation of the nervous system. Neuroscience 89:335–346CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Resnick JM, O’Brien GE, Rubinstein JT (2018) Simulated auditory nerve axon demyelination alters sensitivity and response timing to extracellular stimulation. Hear Res 361:121–137CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Resnick JM, O’Brien GE, Rubinstein JT (2018) Simulated auditory nerve axon demyelination alters sensitivity and response timing to extracellular stimulation. Hear Res 361:121–137CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Rothauser EH (1969) IEEE recommended practice for speech quality measurements. IEEE Trans Audio Electroacoust 17:225–246CrossRef Rothauser EH (1969) IEEE recommended practice for speech quality measurements. IEEE Trans Audio Electroacoust 17:225–246CrossRef
go back to reference Saleh SM, Saeed SR, Meerton L et al (2013) Clinical use of electrode differentiation to enhance programming of cochlear implants. Cochlear Implants Int 14:16–18CrossRef Saleh SM, Saeed SR, Meerton L et al (2013) Clinical use of electrode differentiation to enhance programming of cochlear implants. Cochlear Implants Int 14:16–18CrossRef
go back to reference Schvartz-Leyzac KC, Zwolan TA, Pfingst BE (2017) Effects of electrode deactivation on speech recognition in multichannel cochlear implant recipients. Cochlear Implants Int 18:324–334CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Schvartz-Leyzac KC, Zwolan TA, Pfingst BE (2017) Effects of electrode deactivation on speech recognition in multichannel cochlear implant recipients. Cochlear Implants Int 18:324–334CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Shannon RV (1983) Multichannel electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve in man. II. Channel interaction. Hear Res 12:1–16CrossRefPubMed Shannon RV (1983) Multichannel electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve in man. II. Channel interaction. Hear Res 12:1–16CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Studebaker GA (1985) A rationalized arcsine transform. J Speech Lang Hear Res 28:455–462CrossRef Studebaker GA (1985) A rationalized arcsine transform. J Speech Lang Hear Res 28:455–462CrossRef
go back to reference 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
go back to reference van Dijk JE, van Olphen AF, Langereis MC et al (1999) Predictors of cochlear implant performance. Audiology 38:109–116CrossRefPubMed van Dijk JE, van Olphen AF, Langereis MC et al (1999) Predictors of cochlear implant performance. Audiology 38:109–116CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Van Wieringen A, Macherey O, Carlyon RP et al (2008) Alternative pulse shapes in electrical hearing. Hear Res 242:154–163CrossRefPubMed Van Wieringen A, Macherey O, Carlyon RP et al (2008) Alternative pulse shapes in electrical hearing. Hear Res 242:154–163CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Vickers D, Degun A, Canas A et al (2016) Deactivating cochlear implant electrodes based on pitch information for users of the ACE strategy. In: Physiology, psychoacoustics and cognition in normal and impaired hearing. Springer, pp 115–123 Vickers D, Degun A, Canas A et al (2016) Deactivating cochlear implant electrodes based on pitch information for users of the ACE strategy. In: Physiology, psychoacoustics and cognition in normal and impaired hearing. Springer, pp 115–123
go back to reference Zhou N (2017) Deactivating stimulation sites based on low-rate thresholds improves spectral ripple and speech reception thresholds in cochlear implant users. J Acoust Soc Am 141:EL243–EL248CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Zhou N (2017) Deactivating stimulation sites based on low-rate thresholds improves spectral ripple and speech reception thresholds in cochlear implant users. J Acoust Soc Am 141:EL243–EL248CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Zimmermann CE, Burgess BJ, Nadol JB Jr (1995) Patterns of degeneration in the human cochlear nerve. Hear Res 90:192–201CrossRefPubMed Zimmermann CE, Burgess BJ, Nadol JB Jr (1995) Patterns of degeneration in the human cochlear nerve. Hear Res 90:192–201CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Zwolan TA, Collins LM, Wakefield GH (1997) Electrode discrimination and speech recognition in postlingually deafened adult cochlear implant subjects. J Acoust Soc Am 102:3673–3685CrossRefPubMed Zwolan TA, Collins LM, Wakefield GH (1997) Electrode discrimination and speech recognition in postlingually deafened adult cochlear implant subjects. J Acoust Soc Am 102:3673–3685CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
A Site-Selection Strategy Based on Polarity Sensitivity for Cochlear Implants: Effects on Spectro-Temporal Resolution and Speech Perception
Authors
Tobias Goehring
Alan Archer-Boyd
John M. Deeks
Julie G. Arenberg
Robert P. Carlyon
Publication date
01-08-2019
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology / Issue 4/2019
Print ISSN: 1525-3961
Electronic ISSN: 1438-7573
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-019-00724-4

Other articles of this Issue 4/2019

Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology 4/2019 Go to the issue