Top

Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2020 | Cochlear Implant | Research Article

Effect of the Relative Timing between Same-Polarity Pulses on Thresholds and Loudness in Cochlear Implant Users

Authors: François Guérit, Jeremy Marozeau, Bastian Epp, Robert P. Carlyon

Published in: Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology | Issue 6/2020

Abstract

The effect of the relative timing between pairs of same-polarity monophasic pulses has been studied extensively in single-neuron animal studies and has revealed fundamental properties of the neurons. For human cochlear implant listeners, the requirement to use charge-balanced stimulation and the typical use of symmetric, biphasic pulses limits such measures, because currents of opposite polarities interact at the level of the neural membrane. Here, we propose a paradigm to study same-polarity summation of currents while keeping the stimulation charge-balanced within a short time window. We used pairs of mirrored pseudo-monophasic pulses (a long-low phase followed by a short-high phase for the first pulse and a short-high phase followed by a long-low phase for the second pulse). We assumed that most of the excitation would stem from the two adjacent short-high phases, which had the same polarity. The inter-pulse interval between the short-high phases was varied from 0 to 345 μs. The inter-pulse interval had a significant effect on the perceived loudness, and this effect was consistent with both passive (membrane-related) and active (ion-channel-related) neuronal mechanisms contributing to facilitation. Furthermore, the effect of interval interacted with the polarity of the pulse pairs. At threshold, there was an effect of polarity, but, surprisingly, no effect of interval nor an interaction between the two factors. We discuss possible peripheral origins of these results.

Abbas PJ, Brown CJ (1991) Electrically evoked auditory brainstem response: refractory properties and strength-duration functions. Hear Res 51:139–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-5955(91)90012-XCrossRef

Archer-Boyd AW, Southwell RV, Deeks JM, Turner RE, Carlyon RP (2018) Development and validation of a spectro-temporal processing test for cochlear-implant listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 144:2983–2997. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.5079636CrossRef

Bahmer A, Polak M, Baumann U (2010) Recording of electrically evoked auditory brainstem responses after electrical stimulation with biphasic, triphasic and precision triphasic pulses. Hear Res 259:75–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2009.10.003CrossRef

Bahmer A, Adel Y, Baumann U (2017) Preventing facial nerve stimulation by triphasic pulse stimulation in cochlear implant users: intraoperative recordings. Otol Neurotol 38:e438–e444. https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000001603CrossRef

de Balthasar C, Boëx C, Cosendai G, Valentini G, Sigrist A, Pelizzone M (2003) Channel interactions with high-rate biphasic electrical stimulation in cochlear implant subjects. Hear Res 182:77–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-5955(03)00174-6CrossRef

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 31:247–258. https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0b013e31822f3442CrossRef

Bierer JA, Middlebrooks JC (2004) Cortical responses to cochlear implant stimulation: channel interactions. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 5:32–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-003-3057-7CrossRef

Blamey P, Artieres F, Baskent D, Bergeron F, Beynon A, Burke E, Dillier N, Dowell R, Fraysse B, Gallégo S, Govaerts PJ, Green K, Huber AM, Kleine-Punte A, Maat B, Marx M, Mawman D, Mosnier I, O’Connor AF, O’Leary S, Rousset A, Schauwers K, Skarzynski H, Skarzynski PH, Sterkers O, Terranti A, Truy E, van de Heyning P, Venail F, Vincent C, Lazard DS (2013) Factors affecting auditory performance of postlinguistically deaf adults using cochlear implants: an update with 2251 patients. Audiol Neurotol 18:36–47. https://doi.org/10.1159/000343189CrossRef

Bostock H, Sears TA, Sherratt RM (1983) Spatial distribution of excitability. J Physiol 341:41–58. https://doi.org/10.1113/jphysiol.1983.sp01479CrossRef

Boulet J, White M, Bruce IC (2016) Temporal considerations for stimulating spiral ganglion neurons with cochlear implants. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 17:1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-015-0545-5CrossRef

Brochier, Tim, Francois Guerit, Charlotte Garcia, John M. Deeks, Manohar L. Bance, and Robert P. Carlyon. (2020) “Evaluating and comparing behavioural and electrophysiological estimates of neural health in cochlear implant users.” PsyArXiv. March 3. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/2kp7x

Brown CJ, Abbas PJ, Borland J, Bertschy MR (1996) Electrically evoked whole nerve action potentials in ineraid cochlear implant users: responses to different stimulating electrode configurations and comparison to psychophysical responses. J Speech, Lang Hear Res 39:453–467. https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3903.453CrossRef

Brummer SB, Turner MJ (1977) Electrochemical considerations for safe electrical stimulation of the nervous system with platinum electrodes. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng BME-24:59–63. https://doi.org/10.1109/TBME.1977.326218CrossRef

Carlyon RP, Van Wieringen A, Deeks JM et al (2005) Effect of inter-phase gap on the sensitivity of cochlear implant users to electrical stimulation. Hear Res 205:210–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2005.03.021CrossRef

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 134:503–509. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4807900CrossRef

Carlyon RP, Cosentino S, Deeks JM, Parkinson W, Arenberg JA (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 19:559–567. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-018-0677-5CrossRef

Cartee LA (2000) Evaluation of a model of the cochlear neural membrane. II: comparison of model and physiological measures of membrane properties measured in response to intrameatal electrical stimulation. Hear Res 146:153–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-5955(00)00110-6CrossRef

Cartee LA (2006) Spiral ganglion cell site of excitation II: numerical model analysis. Hear Res 215:22–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2006.02.011CrossRef

Cartee LA, van den Honert C, Finley CC, Miller RL (2000) Evaluation of a model of the cochlear neural membrane. I. Physiological measurement of membrane characteristics in response to intrameatal electrical stimulation. Hear Res 146:143–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-5955(00)00109-XCrossRef

Cartee LA, Miller CA, van den Honert C (2006) Spiral ganglion cell site of excitation I: comparison of scala tympani and intrameatal electrode responses. Hear Res 215:10–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2006.02.012CrossRef

Colombo J, Parkins CW (1987) A model of electrical excitation of the mammalian auditory-nerve neuron. Hear Res 31:287–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-5955(87)90197-3CrossRef

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

Goehring T, Archer-Boyd A, Deeks JM, Arenberg JG, Carlyon RP (2019) A site-selection strategy based on polarity sensitivity for cochlear implants: effects on spectro-temporal resolution and speech perception. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 448:431–448. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-019-00724-4CrossRef

Guérit F, Marozeau J, Deeks JM, Epp B, Carlyon RP (2018) Effects of the relative timing of opposite-polarity pulses on loudness for cochlear implant listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 144:2751–2763. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.5070150CrossRef

Hodgkin AL, Huxley AF (1952) A quantitative description of membrane current and its application to conduction and excitation in nerve. J Physiol 117:500–544. https://doi.org/10.1113/jphysiol.1952.sp004764CrossRef

van den Honert C, Mortimer JT (1979) The response of the Myelinated nerve Fiber to short duration biphasic stimulating currents. Ann Biomed Eng 7:117–125. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02363130CrossRef

Jahn KN, Arenberg JG (2019a) Evaluating psychophysical polarity sensitivity as an indirect estimate of neural status in cochlear implant listeners. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 20:415–430. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-019-00718-2CrossRef

Jahn KN, Arenberg JG (2019b) Polarity sensitivity in pediatric and adult cochlear implant listeners. Trends Hear 23:1–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/2331216519862987CrossRef

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

Karg SA, Lackner C, Hemmert W (2013) Temporal interaction in electrical hearing elucidates auditory nerve dynamics in humans. Hear Res 299:10–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2013.01.015CrossRef

Lapicque L (1907) Recherches quantitatives sur l’excitation électrique des nerfs traitée comme une polarisation. J Physiol Pathol Générale 9:620–635

Leake PA, Hradek GT (1988) Cochlear pathology of long term neomycin induced deafness in cats. Hear Res 33:11–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-5955(88)90018-4CrossRef

Levitt H (1971) Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. J Acoust Soc Am 49:467–477. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1912375CrossRef

Liberman MC, Oliver ME (1984) Morphometry of intracellularly labeled neurons of the auditory nerve: correlations with functional properties. J Comp Neurol 223:163–176. https://doi.org/10.1002/cne.902230203CrossRef

Lilly JC, Hughes JR, Alvord EC Jr, Galkin TW (1955) Brief, noninjurious electric waveform for stimulation of the brain. Science 121(80):468–469. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.121.3144.468CrossRef

Lucas K (1910) Quantitative researches on the summation of inadequate stimuli in muscle and nerve, with observations on the time-factor in electric excitation. J Physiol 39:461–475

Macherey O, van Wieringen A, Carlyon RP, Deeks JM, Wouters J (2006) Asymmetric pulses in cochlear implants: effects of pulse shape, polarity, and rate. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 7:253–266. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-006-0040-0CrossRef

Macherey O, Carlyon RP, van Wieringen A, Deeks JM, Wouters J (2008) Higher sensitivity of human auditory nerve fibers to positive electrical currents. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 9:241–251. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-008-0112-4CrossRef

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 18:513–527. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-016-0614-4CrossRef

McKay CM, McDermott HJ (1998) Loudness perception with pulsatile electrical stimulation: the effect of interpulse intervals. J Acoust Soc Am 104:1061–1s074. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.423316CrossRef

McKay CM, Lim HH, Lenarz T (2013) Temporal processing in the auditory system: insights from cochlear and auditory midbrain implantees. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 14:103–124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-012-0354-z

Merrill DR, Bikson M, Jefferys JGR (2005) Electrical stimulation of excitable tissue: design of efficacious and safe protocols. J Neurosci Methods 141:171–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2004.10.020CrossRef

Mesnildrey Q (2017) Towards a better understanding of the cochlear implant - auditory nerve interface: from intracochlear electrical recordings to psychophysics. PhD diss., Aix-Marseille Université

Mesnildrey Q, Venail F, Carlyon RP, Macherey O (2020) Polarity sensitivity as a potential correlate of neural degeneration in Cochlear implant users. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 104:89–104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-020-00742-7CrossRef

Miller CA, Abbas PJ, Robinson BK, Rubinstein JT, Matsuoka AJ (1999a) 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

Miller CA, Abbas PJ, Rubinstein JT (1999b) 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

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

Miller CA, Abbas PJ, Hay-McCutcheon MJ et al (2004) Intracochlear and extracochlear ECAPs suggest antidromic action potentials. Hear Res 198:75–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2004.07.005CrossRef

Morsnowski A, Charasse B, Collet L, Killian M, Müller-Deile J (2006) Measuring the refractoriness of the electrically stimulated auditory nerve. Audiol Neurotol 11:389–402. https://doi.org/10.1159/000095966CrossRef

Nadol JB (1997) Patterns of neural degeneration in the human cochlea and auditory nerve: implications for cochlear implantation. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 117:220–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0194-5998(97)70178-5CrossRef

Navntoft CA, Marozeau J, Barkat TR (2020) Ramped pulse shapes are more efficient for cochlear implant stimulation in an animal model. Sci Rep 10:3288. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-60181-5CrossRef

Nelson DA, Donaldson GS (2001) Psychophysical recovery from single-pulse forward masking in electric hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 109:2921–2933. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.137176

Pfingst BE, Holloway LA, Razzaque SA (1996) Effects of pulse separation on detection thresholds for electrical stimulation of the human cochlea. Hear Res 98:77–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-5955(96)00071-8

Pfingst BE, Zhou N, Colesa DJ, Watts MM, Strahl SB, Garadat SN, Schvartz-Leyzac KC, Budenz CL, Raphael Y, Zwolan TA (2015) Importance of cochlear health for implant function. Hear Res 322:77–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2014.09.009CrossRef

Prado-Guitierrez P, Fewster LM, Heasman JM, McKay CM, Shepherd RK (2006) Effect of interphase gap and pulse duration on electrically evoked potentials is correlated with auditory nerve survival. Hear Res 215:47–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2006.03.006CrossRef

Ramekers D, Versnel H, Strahl SB, Smeets EM, Klis SFL, Grolman W (2014) Auditory-nerve responses to varied inter-phase gap and phase duration of the electric pulse stimulus as predictors for neuronal degeneration. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 15:187–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-013-0440-xCrossRef

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 153:43–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-5955(00)00256-2CrossRef

Resnick JM, O’Brien G, Rubinstein JT (2018) Simulated auditory nerve axon demyelination alters sensitivity and response timing to extracellular stimulation. Hear Res 361:121–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2018.01.014CrossRef

Smit JE, Hanekom T, Hanekom JJ (2008) Predicting action potential characteristics of human auditory nerve fibres through modification of the Hodgkin-Huxley equations. S Afr J Sci 104:284–292

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 14:359–377. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-013-0377-0CrossRef

van Wieringen A, Macherey O, Carlyon RP, Deeks JM, Wouters J (2008) Alternative pulse shapes in electrical hearing. Hear Res 242:154–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2008.03.005CrossRef

Title: Effect of the Relative Timing between Same-Polarity Pulses on Thresholds and Loudness in Cochlear Implant Users
Authors: François Guérit
Jeremy Marozeau
Bastian Epp
Robert P. Carlyon
Publication date: 01-12-2020
Publisher: Springer US
Keyword: Cochlear Implant
Published in: Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology / Issue 6/2020
Print ISSN: 1525-3961
Electronic ISSN: 1438-7573
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-020-00767-y

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Effect of the Relative Timing between Same-Polarity Pulses on Thresholds and Loudness in Cochlear Implant Users

Abstract

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 6/2020

The Effect of Phantom Stimulation and Pseudomonophasic Pulse Shapes on Pitch Perception by Cochlear Implant Listeners

Does the “Reticular Lamina Nonlinearity” Contribute to the Basal DPOAE Source?

Gap Detection Deficits in Chinchillas with Selective Carboplatin-Induced Inner Hair Cell Loss

The Temporal Fine Structure of Background Noise Determines the Benefit of Bimodal Hearing for Recognizing Speech

Perceptual Weighting of Binaural Lateralization Cues across Frequency Bands