Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology 3/2015

01-06-2015 | Research Article

Perceptual Interactions Between Electrodes Using Focused and Monopolar Cochlear Stimulation

Authors: Jeremy Marozeau, Hugh J. McDermott, Brett A. Swanson, Colette M. McKay

Published in: Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology | Issue 3/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

In today’s cochlear implant (CI) systems, the monopolar (MP) electrode configuration is the most commonly used stimulation mode, requiring only a single current source. However, with an implant that will allow simultaneous activation of multiple independent current sources, it is possible to implement an all-polar (AP) stimulation mode designed to create a focused electrical field. The goal of this experiment was to study the potential benefits of this all-polar mode for reducing uncontrolled electrode interactions compared with the monopolar mode. The five participants who took part in the study were implanted with a research device that was connected via a percutaneous connector to a benchtop stimulator providing 22 independent current sources. The perceptual effects of the AP mode were tested in three experiments. In Experiment 1, the current level difference between loudness-matched sequential and simultaneous stimuli composed of 2 spatially separated pulse trains was measured as function of the electrode separation. Results indicated a strong current-summation interaction for simultaneous stimuli in the MP mode for separations up to at least 4.8 mm. No significant interaction was found in the AP mode beyond a separation of 2.4 mm. In Experiment 2, a forward-masking paradigm was used with fixed equally loud probes in AP and MP modes, and AP maskers presented on different electrode positions. Results indicated a similar spatial masking pattern between modes. In Experiment 3, subjects were asked to discriminate between across-electrode temporal delays. It was hypothesized that discrimination would decrease with electrode separation faster in AP compared to MP modes. However, results showed no difference between the two modes. Overall, the results indicated that the AP mode produced less current spread than MP mode but did not lead to a significant advantage in terms of spread of neuronal excitation at equally loud levels.
Literature
go back to reference Bierer JA (2007) Threshold and channel interaction in cochlear implant users: evaluation of the tripolar electrode configuration. J Acoust Soc Am 121:1642–1653CrossRefPubMed Bierer JA (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 31:247–258CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed 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 31:247–258CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
go back to reference Blamey P et al (2013) Factors affecting auditory performance of postlinguistically deaf adults using cochlear implants: an update with 2251 patients. Audiol Neurootol 18:36–47CrossRefPubMed Blamey P et al (2013) Factors affecting auditory performance of postlinguistically deaf adults using cochlear implants: an update with 2251 patients. Audiol Neurootol 18:36–47CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Dai H, Micheyl C (2010) On the choice of adequate randomization ranges for limiting the use of unwanted cues in same-different, dual-pair, and oddity tasks. Atten Percept Psychophys 72:538–547CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed Dai H, Micheyl C (2010) On the choice of adequate randomization ranges for limiting the use of unwanted cues in same-different, dual-pair, and oddity tasks. Atten Percept Psychophys 72:538–547CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
go back to reference Fielden CA, Kluk K, McKay CM (2014) Interpulse interval discrimination within and across channels: comparison of monopolar and tripolar mode of stimulation. J Acoust Soc Am 135:2913–2922CrossRefPubMed Fielden CA, Kluk K, McKay CM (2014) Interpulse interval discrimination within and across channels: comparison of monopolar and tripolar mode of stimulation. J Acoust Soc Am 135:2913–2922CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Fielden CA, Kluk K, McKay CM (2013) Place specificity of monopolar and tripolar stimuli in cochlear implants: the influence of residual masking. J Acoust Soc Am 133:4109–4123CrossRefPubMed Fielden CA, Kluk K, McKay CM (2013) Place specificity of monopolar and tripolar stimuli in cochlear implants: the influence of residual masking. J Acoust Soc Am 133:4109–4123CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Fraser M, McKay CM (2012) Temporal modulation transfer functions in cochlear implantees using a method that limits overall loudness cues. Hear Res 283:59–69CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed Fraser M, McKay CM (2012) Temporal modulation transfer functions in cochlear implantees using a method that limits overall loudness cues. Hear Res 283:59–69CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
go back to reference Friesen LM, Shannon RV, Baskent D, Wang X (2001) Speech recognition in noise as a function of the number of spectral channels: comparison of acoustic hearing and cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am 110:1150–1163CrossRefPubMed Friesen LM, Shannon RV, Baskent D, Wang X (2001) Speech recognition in noise as a function of the number of spectral channels: comparison of acoustic hearing and cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am 110:1150–1163CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Frijns JH, Dekker DM, Briaire JJ (2011) Neural excitation patterns induced by phased-array stimulation in the implanted human cochlea. Acta Otolaryngol 131:362–370CrossRefPubMed Frijns JH, Dekker DM, Briaire JJ (2011) Neural excitation patterns induced by phased-array stimulation in the implanted human cochlea. Acta Otolaryngol 131:362–370CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Frijns JH, Kalkman RK, Vanpoucke FJ, Bongers JS, Briaire JJ (2009) Simultaneous and non-simultaneous dual electrode stimulation in cochlear implants: evidence for two neural response modalities. Acta Otolaryngol 129:433–439CrossRefPubMed Frijns JH, Kalkman RK, Vanpoucke FJ, Bongers JS, Briaire JJ (2009) Simultaneous and non-simultaneous dual electrode stimulation in cochlear implants: evidence for two neural response modalities. Acta Otolaryngol 129:433–439CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Fu Q-J, Shannon RV, Wang X (1998) Effects of noise and spectral resolution on vowel and consonant recognition: acoustic and electric hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 104:3586–3596CrossRefPubMed Fu Q-J, Shannon RV, Wang X (1998) Effects of noise and spectral resolution on vowel and consonant recognition: acoustic and electric hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 104:3586–3596CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Landsberger DM, Galvin JJ (2011) Discrimination between sequential and simultaneous virtual channels with electrical hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 130:1559–1566CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed Landsberger DM, Galvin JJ (2011) Discrimination between sequential and simultaneous virtual channels with electrical hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 130:1559–1566CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
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 15:293–304CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed 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 15:293–304CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
go back to reference Marks LE, Florentine M (2011) Measurement of loudness, part I: methods, problems and pitfalls. In: Florentine M, Popper AN, Fay RR (eds) Springer handbook of auditory research: loudness. Springer, New-York, pp 17–56 Marks LE, Florentine M (2011) Measurement of loudness, part I: methods, problems and pitfalls. In: Florentine M, Popper AN, Fay RR (eds) Springer handbook of auditory research: loudness. Springer, New-York, pp 17–56
go back to reference McDermott H (2011) Music perception. In: Zeng FG, Popper AN, Fay RR, (eds) Auditory prostheses: new horizons. Springer, New York, pp 305–339CrossRef McDermott H (2011) Music perception. In: Zeng FG, Popper AN, Fay RR, (eds) Auditory prostheses: new horizons. Springer, New York, pp 305–339CrossRef
go back to reference McKay CM (2012) Forward masking as a method of measuring place specificity of neural excitation in cochlear implants: a review of methods and interpretation. J Acoust Soc Am 131:2209–2224CrossRefPubMed McKay CM (2012) Forward masking as a method of measuring place specificity of neural excitation in cochlear implants: a review of methods and interpretation. J Acoust Soc Am 131:2209–2224CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference McKay CM, McDermott HJ (1999) The perceptual effects of current pulse duration in electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve. J Acoust Soc Am 106:998–1009CrossRefPubMed McKay CM, McDermott HJ (1999) The perceptual effects of current pulse duration in electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve. J Acoust Soc Am 106:998–1009CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference McKay CM, Henshall KR, Farrell RJ, McDermott HJ (2003) A practical method of predicting the loudness of complex electrical stimuli. J Acoust Soc Am 113:2054–2063CrossRefPubMed McKay CM, Henshall KR, Farrell RJ, McDermott HJ (2003) A practical method of predicting the loudness of complex electrical stimuli. J Acoust Soc Am 113:2054–2063CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Moore BC, Alcántara JI (2001) The use of psychophysical tuning curves to explore dead regions in the cochlea. Ear Hear 22:268–278CrossRefPubMed Moore BC, Alcántara JI (2001) The use of psychophysical tuning curves to explore dead regions in the cochlea. Ear Hear 22:268–278CrossRefPubMed
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 Shannon RV (1992) A model of safe levels for electrical stimulation. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 39:424–426CrossRefPubMed Shannon RV (1992) A model of safe levels for electrical stimulation. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 39:424–426CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Smith ZM (2009) Multi-electrode channel configurations. In: Patent Application Publication (CN102361666A, ed). US Smith ZM (2009) Multi-electrode channel configurations. In: Patent Application Publication (CN102361666A, ed). US
go back to reference Smith ZM, Parkinson WS, Long CJ (2013) Multipolar current focusing increases spectral resolution in cochlear implants. In: Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC), 2013 35th Annual International Conference of the IEEE, pp 2796-2799: IEEE Smith ZM, Parkinson WS, Long CJ (2013) Multipolar current focusing increases spectral resolution in cochlear implants. In: Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC), 2013 35th Annual International Conference of the IEEE, pp 2796-2799: IEEE
go back to reference Srinivasan AG, Padilla M, Shannon RV, Landsberger DM (2013) Improving speech perception in noise with current focusing in cochlear implant users. Hear Res 299:29–36CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed Srinivasan AG, Padilla M, Shannon RV, Landsberger DM (2013) Improving speech perception in noise with current focusing in cochlear implant users. Hear Res 299:29–36CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
go back to reference van den Honert C, Kelsall DC (2007) Focused intracochlear electric stimulation with phased array channels. J Acoust Soc Am 121:3703–3716CrossRefPubMed van den Honert C, Kelsall DC (2007) Focused intracochlear electric stimulation with phased array channels. J Acoust Soc Am 121:3703–3716CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Vandali AE, Whitford LA, Plant KL, Clark GM (2000) Speech perception as a function of electrical stimulation rate: using the Nucleus 24 cochlear implant system. Ear Hear 21:608–624CrossRefPubMed Vandali AE, Whitford LA, Plant KL, Clark GM (2000) Speech perception as a function of electrical stimulation rate: using the Nucleus 24 cochlear implant system. Ear Hear 21:608–624CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Perceptual Interactions Between Electrodes Using Focused and Monopolar Cochlear Stimulation
Authors
Jeremy Marozeau
Hugh J. McDermott
Brett A. Swanson
Colette M. McKay
Publication date
01-06-2015
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology / Issue 3/2015
Print ISSN: 1525-3961
Electronic ISSN: 1438-7573
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-015-0511-2

Other articles of this Issue 3/2015

Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology 3/2015 Go to the issue