Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology 5/2018

Open Access 01-10-2018 | Research Article

Effect of Stimulus Polarity on Detection Thresholds in Cochlear Implant Users: Relationships with Average Threshold, Gap Detection, and Rate Discrimination

Authors: Robert P. Carlyon, Stefano Cosentino, John M. Deeks, Wendy Parkinson, Julie A. Arenberg

Published in: Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology | Issue 5/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Previous psychophysical and modeling studies suggest that cathodic stimulation by a cochlear implant (CI) may preferentially activate the peripheral processes of the auditory nerve, whereas anodic stimulation may preferentially activate the central axons. Because neural degeneration typically starts with loss of the peripheral processes, lower thresholds for cathodic than for anodic stimulation may indicate good local neural survival. We measured thresholds for 99-pulse-per-second trains of triphasic (TP) pulses where the central high-amplitude phase was either anodic (TP-A) or cathodic (TP-C). Thresholds were obtained in monopolar mode from four or five electrodes and a total of eight ears from subjects implanted with the Advanced Bionics CI. When between-subject differences were removed, there was a modest but significant correlation between the polarity effect (TP-C threshold minus TP-A threshold) and the average of TP-C and TP-A thresholds, consistent with the hypothesis that a large polarity effect corresponds to good neural survival. When data were averaged across electrodes for each subject, relatively low thresholds for TP-C correlated with a high “upper limit” (the pulse rate up to which pitch continues to increase) from a previous study (Cosentino et al. J Assoc Otolaryngol 17:371–382). Overall, the results provide modest indirect support for the hypothesis that the polarity effect provides an estimate of local neural survival.
Literature
go back to reference Bierer J (2007) Threshold and channel interaction in cochlear implant users: evaluation of the tripolar electrode configuration. J Acoust Soc Am 121:1642–1653CrossRefPubMed Bierer J (2007) Threshold and channel interaction in cochlear implant users: evaluation of the tripolar electrode configuration. J Acoust Soc Am 121:1642–1653CrossRefPubMed
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 32:633–633 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 32:633–633
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 20:233121651665338CrossRef Bierer JA, Litvak L (2016) Reducing channel interaction through cochlear implant programming may improve speech perception: current focusing and channel deactivation. Trends Hear 20:233121651665338CrossRef
go back to reference Bierer JA, Deeks JM, Billig AJ, Carlyon RP (2015) Comparison of signal and gap-detection thresholds for focused and broad Cochlear implant electrode configurations. Jaro-J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 16:273–284CrossRef Bierer JA, Deeks JM, Billig AJ, Carlyon RP (2015) Comparison of signal and gap-detection thresholds for focused and broad Cochlear implant electrode configurations. Jaro-J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 16:273–284CrossRef
go back to reference Bland JM, Altman DG (1995) Calculating correlation coefficients with repeated observations: part 1-correlation within subjects. Br Med J 310:446CrossRef Bland JM, Altman DG (1995) Calculating correlation coefficients with repeated observations: part 1-correlation within subjects. Br Med J 310:446CrossRef
go back to reference Carlyon RP, Deeks JM (2015) Combined neural and behavioural measures of temporal pitch perception in cochlear implant users. J Acoust Soc Am 138:2885–2905CrossRefPubMed Carlyon RP, Deeks JM (2015) Combined neural and behavioural measures of temporal pitch perception in cochlear implant users. J Acoust Soc Am 138:2885–2905CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference 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
go back to reference Cosentino S, Deeks JM, Carlyon RP (2015) Procedural factors that affect measures of spatial selectivity in cochlear implant users. Trends Hear 19:1–16 Cosentino S, Deeks JM, Carlyon RP (2015) Procedural factors that affect measures of spatial selectivity in cochlear implant users. Trends Hear 19:1–16
go back to reference Cosentino S, Carlyon RP, Deeks JM, Parkinson W, Bierer JA (2016) Rate discrimination, gap detection and ranking of temporal pitch in cochlear implant users. J Assoc Otolaryngol 17:371–382CrossRef Cosentino S, Carlyon RP, Deeks JM, Parkinson W, Bierer JA (2016) Rate discrimination, gap detection and ranking of temporal pitch in cochlear implant users. J Assoc Otolaryngol 17:371–382CrossRef
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 Fu Q-J (2002) Temporal processing and speech recognition in cochlear implant users. Neuroreport 13:1–5CrossRef Fu Q-J (2002) Temporal processing and speech recognition in cochlear implant users. Neuroreport 13:1–5CrossRef
go back to reference Garadat SN, Zwolan TA, Pfingst BE (2013) Using temporal modulation sensitivity to select stimulation sites for processor MAPs in cochlear implant listeners. Audiol Neuro-Otol 18:247–260CrossRef Garadat SN, Zwolan TA, Pfingst BE (2013) Using temporal modulation sensitivity to select stimulation sites for processor MAPs in cochlear implant listeners. Audiol Neuro-Otol 18:247–260CrossRef
go back to reference Goehring T, Arenberg JG, Deeks JM, Carlyon RP (2018) Effect of a channel-selection strategy based on polarity sensitivity on speech perception by cochlear implant users. Assoc Res Otolaryngol Abs 41:42 Goehring T, Arenberg JG, Deeks JM, Carlyon RP (2018) Effect of a channel-selection strategy based on polarity sensitivity on speech perception by cochlear implant users. Assoc Res Otolaryngol Abs 41:42
go back to reference Goldwyn JH, Bierer SM, Bierer JA (2010) Modeling the electrode-neuron interface of cochlear implants: effects of neural survival, electrode placement, and the partial tripolar configuration. Hear Res 268:93–104CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Goldwyn JH, Bierer SM, Bierer JA (2010) Modeling the electrode-neuron interface of cochlear implants: effects of neural survival, electrode placement, and the partial tripolar configuration. Hear Res 268:93–104CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
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, Finley CC, Firszt JB, Holden TA, Brenner C, Potts LG, Gotter BD, Vanderhoof SS, Mispagel K, Heydebrand G, Skinner MW (2013) Factors affecting open-set word recognition in adults with cochlear implants. Ear Hear 34:342–360CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Holden LK, Finley CC, Firszt JB, Holden TA, Brenner C, Potts LG, Gotter BD, Vanderhoof SS, Mispagel K, Heydebrand G, Skinner MW (2013) Factors affecting open-set word recognition in adults with cochlear implants. Ear Hear 34:342–360CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Johnsson LG, Hawkins JE Jr, Kingsley TC, Black FO, Matz GJ (1981) Aminoglycoside-induced cochlear pathology in man. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl 383:1–19PubMed Johnsson LG, Hawkins JE Jr, Kingsley TC, Black FO, Matz GJ (1981) Aminoglycoside-induced cochlear pathology in man. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl 383:1–19PubMed
go back to reference Long CJ, Holden TA, McClelland GH, Parkinson WS, Shelton C, Kelsall DC, Smith ZM (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, Parkinson WS, Shelton C, Kelsall DC, Smith ZM (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, Wieringen A, Carlyon RP, Deeks JM, Wouters J (2006) Asymmetric pulses in cochlear implants: effects of pulse shape, polarity and rate. JARO 7:253–266CrossRefPubMed Macherey O, Wieringen A, Carlyon RP, Deeks JM, Wouters J (2006) Asymmetric pulses in cochlear implants: effects of pulse shape, polarity and rate. JARO 7:253–266CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Macherey O, Carlyon RP, Deeks JM, van Wieringen A, Wouters J (2008) Higher sensitivity of human auditory nerve fibers to positive electrical currents. Jaro-J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 9:241–251CrossRef Macherey O, Carlyon RP, Deeks JM, van Wieringen A, Wouters J (2008) Higher sensitivity of human auditory nerve fibers to positive electrical currents. Jaro-J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 9:241–251CrossRef
go back to reference Macherey O, Deeks JM, Carlyon RP (2011) Extending the limits of place and temporal pitch perception in cochlear implant users. JARO 12:233–251CrossRefPubMed Macherey O, Deeks JM, Carlyon RP (2011) Extending the limits of place and temporal pitch perception in cochlear implant users. JARO 12:233–251CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Mesnildrey Q (2017) Towards a better understanding of the cochlear implant In: Aix-Marseielle Mesnildrey Q (2017) Towards a better understanding of the cochlear implant In: Aix-Marseielle
go back to reference Mesnildrey Q, Macherey O, Carlyon RP, Venail F (2017) Polarity sensitivity in cochlear implants: relation with neural survival? In: Conference on implantable auditory prostheses, p 197. Lake Tahoe, CA, USA Mesnildrey Q, Macherey O, Carlyon RP, Venail F (2017) Polarity sensitivity in cochlear implants: relation with neural survival? In: Conference on implantable auditory prostheses, p 197. Lake Tahoe, CA, USA
go back to reference 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 130:197–218CrossRefPubMed 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 130:197–218CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Miller CA, Abbas PJ, Hay-McCutcheon MJ, Robinson BK, Nourski KV, Jeng FC (2004) Intracochlear and extracochlear ECAPs suggest antidromic action potentials. Hear Res 198:75–86CrossRefPubMed Miller CA, Abbas PJ, Hay-McCutcheon MJ, Robinson BK, Nourski KV, Jeng FC (2004) Intracochlear and extracochlear ECAPs suggest antidromic action potentials. Hear Res 198:75–86CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Nadol JB (1997) Patterns of neural degeneration in the human cochlea and auditory nerve: implications for cochlear implantation. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 117:220–228CrossRefPubMed Nadol JB (1997) Patterns of neural degeneration in the human cochlea and auditory nerve: implications for cochlear implantation. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 117:220–228CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Oldham PD (1962) A note on the analysis of repeated measurements of the same subjects. J Chronic Diseases 15:969–977CrossRef Oldham PD (1962) A note on the analysis of repeated measurements of the same subjects. J Chronic Diseases 15:969–977CrossRef
go back to reference Pfingst BE, Xu L (2004) Across-site variation in detection thresholds and maximum comfortable loudness levels for cochlear implants. Jaro-Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology 5:11–24CrossRef Pfingst BE, Xu L (2004) Across-site variation in detection thresholds and maximum comfortable loudness levels for cochlear implants. Jaro-Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology 5:11–24CrossRef
go back to reference Ranck JB (1975) Which elements are excited in electrical stimulation of mammalian nervous system: a review. Brain Res 98:417–440CrossRef Ranck JB (1975) Which elements are excited in electrical stimulation of mammalian nervous system: a review. Brain Res 98:417–440CrossRef
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 Rattay F, Lutter P, Felix H (2001) 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 (2001) 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
go back to reference Tu Y-K, Gilthorpe MS (2007) Revisiting the relation between change and initial value: a review and evaluation. Statist Med 26:443–457CrossRef Tu Y-K, Gilthorpe MS (2007) Revisiting the relation between change and initial value: a review and evaluation. Statist Med 26:443–457CrossRef
go back to reference Undurraga JA, 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, 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
go back to reference van Wieringen A, Macherey O, Carlyon RP, Deeks JM, Wouters J (2008) Alternative pulse shapes in electrical hearing. Hear Res 242:154–163CrossRefPubMed van Wieringen A, Macherey O, Carlyon RP, Deeks JM, Wouters J (2008) Alternative pulse shapes in electrical hearing. Hear Res 242:154–163CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Wilson BS (1997) The future of cochlear implants. Brit J of Audiol 31:205–225CrossRef Wilson BS (1997) The future of cochlear implants. Brit J of Audiol 31:205–225CrossRef
go back to reference Won JH, Clinard CG, Kwon S, Dasika VK, Nie K, Drennan WR, Tremblay KL, Rubinstein JT (2011) Relationship between behavioral and physiological spectral-ripple discrimination. Jaro-J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 12:375–393CrossRef Won JH, Clinard CG, Kwon S, Dasika VK, Nie K, Drennan WR, Tremblay KL, Rubinstein JT (2011) Relationship between behavioral and physiological spectral-ripple discrimination. Jaro-J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 12:375–393CrossRef
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 Zhou N, Pfingst BE (2016) Evaluating multipulse integration as a neural-health correlate in human cochlear-implant users: relationship to spatial selectivity. J Acoust Soc Am 140:1537–1547CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Zhou N, Pfingst BE (2016) Evaluating multipulse integration as a neural-health correlate in human cochlear-implant users: relationship to spatial selectivity. J Acoust Soc Am 140:1537–1547CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Zhou N, Kraft C, Colesa D, Pfingst B (2015) Integration of pulse trains in humans and guinea pigs with cochlear implants. Jaro-J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 16:523–534CrossRef Zhou N, Kraft C, Colesa D, Pfingst B (2015) Integration of pulse trains in humans and guinea pigs with cochlear implants. Jaro-J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 16:523–534CrossRef
go back to reference Zimmermann CE, Burgess BJ, Nadol JB (1995) Patterns of degeneration in the human cochlear nerve. Hear Res 90:192–201CrossRefPubMed Zimmermann CE, Burgess BJ, Nadol JB (1995) Patterns of degeneration in the human cochlear nerve. Hear Res 90:192–201CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Effect of Stimulus Polarity on Detection Thresholds in Cochlear Implant Users: Relationships with Average Threshold, Gap Detection, and Rate Discrimination
Authors
Robert P. Carlyon
Stefano Cosentino
John M. Deeks
Wendy Parkinson
Julie A. Arenberg
Publication date
01-10-2018
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology / Issue 5/2018
Print ISSN: 1525-3961
Electronic ISSN: 1438-7573
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-018-0677-5

Other articles of this Issue 5/2018

Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology 5/2018 Go to the issue