Top

Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology

Published in:

Open Access 02-12-2022 | Nerve Stimulation | Research Article

Anodic Polarity Minimizes Facial Nerve Stimulation as a Side Effect of Cochlear Implantation

Authors: Wiebke S. Konerding, Peter Baumhoff, Andrej Kral

Published in: Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology | Issue 1/2023

Abstract

One severe side effect of the use of cochlear implants (CI) is coincidental facial nerve stimulation (FNS). Clinical methods to alleviate FNS range from the reprogramming of processor settings to revision surgery. We systematically assessed different changes in CI stimulation modes that have been discussed in the literature as “rescue factors” from FNS: electrode configuration (broad to focused), pulse shape (symmetric biphasic to pseudo-monophasic), and pulse polarity (cathodic to anodic). An FNS was assessed, based on electrophysiological thresholds, in 204 electrically evoked compound action potential (eCAP) input/output functions recorded from 33 ears of 26 guinea pigs. The stimulation level difference between auditory nerve eCAP threshold and FNS threshold was expressed as the eCAP-to-FNS offset. Coincidental FNS occurred in all animals and in 45% of all recordings. A change from monopolar to focused (bipolar, tripolar) configurations minimized FNS. The Euclidean distance between the CI contacts and the facial nerve explained no more than 33% of the variance in FNS thresholds. For both the FNS threshold and the eCAP-to-FNS offset, the change from cathodic to anodic pulse polarity significantly reduced FNS and permitted a gain of 14–71% of the dynamic range of the eCAP response. This “anodic rescue effect” was stronger for pseudo-monophasic pulses as compared to the symmetric biphasic pulse shape. These results provide possible mechanisms underlying recent clinical interventions to alleviate FNS. The “anodic-rescue effect” may offer a non-invasive therapeutic option for FNS in human CI users that should be tested clinically, preferably in combination with current-focusing methods.

Aljazeeri IA, Khurayzi T, Al-Amro M, Alzhrani F, Alsanosi A (2021) Evaluation of computed tomography parameters in patients with facial nerve stimulation post-cochlear implantation. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 278(10):3789–3794. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-020-06486-7CrossRefPubMed

Cohen NL, Hoffman RA (1991) Complications of cochlear implant surgery in adults and children. Annals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology 100(9):708–711. https://doi.org/10.1177/000348949110000903CrossRefPubMed

Niparko JK, Oviatt DL, Coker NJ, Sutton L, Waltzman SB, Cohen NL (1991) Facial nerve stimulation with cochlear implantation. Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery 104(6):826–830. https://doi.org/10.1177/019459989110400610CrossRefPubMed

Kelsall DC, Shallop JK, Brammeier TG, Prenger EC (1997) Facial nerve stimulation after nucleus 22-channel cochlear implantation. Am J Otol 18(3):336–341PubMed

Smullen JL, Polak M, Hodges AV, Payne SB, Telischi FF, Balkany TJ (2005) Facial nerve stimulation after cochlear implantation. Laryngoscope 115(6):977–982. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.MLG.0000163100.37713.C6CrossRefPubMed

Cohen NL, Hoffman RA, Stroschein M (1988) Medical or surgical complications related to the nucleus multichannel cochlear implant. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 97(5_suppl2):8–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/00034894880975S202

Bigelow DC, Kay DJ, Rafter KO, Montes M, Knox GW, Yousem DM (1998) Facial nerve stimulation from cochlear implants. Am J Otol 19(2):163–169PubMed

Cushing SL, Papsin BC, Gordon KA (2006) Incidence and characteristics of facial nerve stimulation in children with cochlear implants. Laryngoscope 116(10):1787–1791. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlg.0000231303.85828.20CrossRefPubMed

Alzhrani F, Halawani R, Basodan S, Hudeib R (2021) Investigating facial nerve stimulation after cochlear implantation in adult and pediatric recipients. The Laryngoscope 131(2):374–379. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.28632

10.

Pietsch M, Aguirre Dávila L, Erfurt P, Avci E, Lenarz T, Kral A (2017) Spiral form of the human cochlea results from spatial constraints. Sci Rep 7(1):7500. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-07795-4CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Burck I, Helal RA, Naguib NN, Nour-Eldin NA, Scholtz J, Martin S, Leinung M, Helbig S, Stöver T, Lehn A (2022) Postoperative radiological assessment of the mastoid facial canal in cochlear implant patients in correlation with facial nerve stimulation. Eur Radiol 32(1):234–242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-021-08128-wCrossRefPubMed

12.

Pires JS, Melo AS, Caiado R, Martins JH, Elói Moura J, Silva LF (2018) Facial nerve stimulation after cochlear implantation: our experience in 448 adult patients. Cochlear Implants Int 19(4):193–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/14670100.2018.1452561CrossRefPubMed

13.

Van Horn A, Hayden C, Mahairas AD, Leader P, Bush ML (2020) Factors influencing aberrant facial nerve stimulation following cochlear implantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Otol Neurotol 41(8):1050–1059. https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000002693CrossRefPubMed

14.

Zeng F, Tang Q, Lu T (2014) Abnormal pitch perception produced by cochlear implant stimulation. PLoS ONE 9(2):e88662. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0088662CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Battmer R, Pesch J, Stöver T, Lesinski-Schiedat A, Lenarz M, Lenarz T (2006) Elimination of facial nerve stimulation by reimplantation in cochlear implant subjects. Otol Neurotol 27(7):918–922. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mao.0000235374.85739.c6CrossRefPubMed

16.

Bahmer A, Baumann U (2016) The underlying mechanism of preventing facial nerve stimulation by triphasic pulse stimulation in cochlear implant users assessed with objective measure. Otol Neurotol 37(9):1231–1237. https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000001156CrossRefPubMed

17.

Braun K, Walker K, Sürth W, Löwenheim H, Tropitzsch A (2019) Triphasic pulses in cochlear implant patients with facial nerve stimulation. Otol Neurotol 40(10):1268–1277. https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000002398CrossRefPubMed

18.

Gärtner L, Lenarz T, Ivanauskaite J, Büchner A (2022) Facial nerve stimulation in cochlear implant users – a matter of stimulus parameters? Cochlear Implants Int 23(3):1–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/14670100.2022.2026025CrossRef

19.

Xu L, Skidmore J, Luo J, Chao X, Wang R, Wang H, He S (2020) The effect of pulse polarity on neural response of the electrically-stimulated cochlear nerve in children with cochlear nerve deficiency and children with normal-sized cochlear nerves. Ear Hear 41(5):1306. https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000000854CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Herrmann DP, Kretzer K, Pieper SH, Bahmer A (2021) Effects of electrical pulse polarity shape on intra cochlear neural responses in humans: triphasic pulses with anodic and cathodic second phase. Hearing Research 412:108375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2021.108375

21.

Bahmer A, Adel Y, Baumann U (2017) Preventing facial nerve stimulation by triphasic pulse stimulation in cochlear implant users: intraoperative recordings. Otol Neurotol 38(10):e438–e444. https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000001603CrossRefPubMed

22.

Eitutis ST, Carlyon RP, Tam YC, Salorio-Corbetto M, Vanat Z, Tebbutt K, Bardsley R, Powell HR, Chowdhury S, Tysome JR (2022) Management of severe facial nerve cross stimulation by cochlear implant replacement to change pulse shape and grounding configuration: a case-series. Otol Neurotol 43(4):452–459. https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000003493CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

23.

Zellhuber N, Helbig R, James P, Bloching M, Lyutenski S (2022) Multi-mode grounding and monophasic passive discharge stimulation avoid aberrant facial nerve stimulation following cochlear implantation. Clinical Case Reports 10(2):e05360. https://doi.org/10.1002/ccr3.5360CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

24.

Alnafjan F, Hasan Z, Sanli H, da Cruz MJ (2021) Risk factors for facial nerve and other nonauditory side effects following cochlear implantation. Otol Neurotol 42(8):e1022–e1029. https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000003162CrossRefPubMed

25.

Konerding W, Arenberg JG, Kral A, Baumhoff P (2022) Late electrically-evoked compound action potentials as markers for acute micro-lesions of spiral ganglion neurons. Hear Res 413:108057. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2020.108057CrossRefPubMed

26.

Quass GL, Kurt S, Hildebrandt KJ, Kral A (2018) Electrical stimulation of the midbrain excites the auditory cortex asymmetrically. Brain Stimul 11(5):1161–1174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2018.05.009CrossRefPubMed

27.

Navntoft CA, Marozeau J, Barkat TR (2019) Cochlear implant surgery and electrically-evoked auditory brainstem response recordings in C57BL/6 mice. JoVE J Vis Exp 143. https://doi.org/10.3791/58073

28.

Navntoft CA, Marozeau J, Barkat TR (2020) Ramped pulse shapes are more efficient for cochlear implant stimulation in an animal model. Sci Rep 10(1):3288. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-60181-5CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

29.

Kaufman AC, Naples JG, Bigelow DC, Eliades SJ, Brant JA, Kaufman HS, Ruckenstein MJ (2020) Lateral wall electrodes increase the rate of postactivation nonauditory percepts. Otol Neurotol 41(5):e575–e579. https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000002610CrossRefPubMed

30.

Kral A, Aplin F, Maier H (2021) Chapter 4 - Neuronal excitation. In A. Kral, F. Aplin & H. Maier (Eds.), Prostheses for the Brain (pp. 55–75). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-818892-7.00003-1

31.

Moon AK, Zwolan TA, Pfingst BE (1993) Effects of phase duration on detection of electrical stimulation of the human cochlea. Hear Res 67(1–2):166–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-5955(93)90244-UCrossRefPubMed

32.

Parkins CW, Colombo J (1987) Auditory-nerve single-neuron thresholds to electrical stimulation from scala tympani electrodes. Hear Res 31(3):267–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-5955(87)90196-1CrossRefPubMed

33.

Bierer JA, Middlebrooks JC (2002) Auditory cortical images of cochlear-implant stimuli: dependence on electrode configuration. J Neurophysiol 87(1):478–492. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00212.2001CrossRefPubMed

34.

Kral A, Hartmann R, Mortazavi D, Klinke R (1998) Spatial resolution of cochlear implants: the electrical field and excitation of auditory afferents. Hear Res 121(1–2):11–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-5955(98)00061-6CrossRefPubMed

35.

Zhu Z, Tang Q, Zeng F, Guan T, Ye D (2012) Cochlear-implant spatial selectivity with monopolar, bipolar and tripolar stimulation. Hear Res 283(1–2):45–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2011.11.005CrossRefPubMed

36.

Jolly CN, Spelman FA, Clopton BM (1996) Quadrupolar stimulation for cochlear prostheses: modeling and experimental data. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 43(8):857–865. https://doi.org/10.1109/10.508549CrossRefPubMed

37.

Macherey O, Cazals Y (2016) Effects of pulse shape and polarity on sensitivity to cochlear implant stimulation: a chronic study in guinea pigs. Adv Exp Med Biol 894:133–142. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25474-6_15CrossRefPubMed

38.

Miller CA, Abbas PJ, Rubinstein JT, Robinson BK, Matsuoka AJ, Woodworth G (1998) Electrically evoked compound action potentials of guinea pig and cat: responses to monopolar, monophasic stimulation. Hear Res 119(1):142–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-5955(98)00046-XCrossRefPubMed

39.

Westen AA, Dekker D, Briaire JJ, Frijns J (2011) Stimulus level effects on neural excitation and eCAP amplitude. Hear Res 280(1–2):166–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2011.05.014CrossRefPubMed

40.

Heshmat A, Sajedi S, Schrott-Fischer A, Rattay F (2021) Polarity sensitivity of human auditory nerve fibers based on pulse shape, cochlear implant stimulation strategy and array. Front Neurosci 15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2021.751599

41.

Undurraga JA, Van 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(1–2):146–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2010.06.017CrossRefPubMed

42.

Hartmann R, Topp G, Klinke R (1984) Discharge patterns of cat primary auditory fibers with electrical stimulation of the cochlea. Hear Res 13(1):47–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-5955(84)90094-7CrossRefPubMed

43.

Kruschinski C, Weber BP, Pabst R (2003) Clinical relevance of the distance between the cochlea and the facial nerve in cochlear implantation. Otol Neurotol 24(5):823–827. https://doi.org/10.1097/00129492-200309000-00022CrossRefPubMed

44.

Seyyedi M, Herrmann BS, Eddington DK, Nadol JB Jr (2013) The pathologic basis of facial nerve stimulation in otosclerosis and multi-channel cochlear implantation. Otol Neurotol 34(9):1603–1609. https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0b013e3182979398CrossRefPubMed

45.

van der Westhuizen J, Hanekom T, Hanekom JJ (2021) Apical reference stimulation: a possible solution to facial nerve stimulation. Ear Hear 43(4):1189–1197. https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000001170CrossRefPubMed

46.

Hatch JL, Rizk HG, Moore MW, Camposeo EE, Nguyen SA, Lambert PR, Meyer TA, McRackan TR (2017) Can preoperative CT scans be used to predict facial nerve stimulation following CI? Otol Neurotol 38(8):1112–1117. https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000001497CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

47.

Walkowiak A, Lorens A, Polak M, Kostek B, Skarzynski H, Szkielkowska A, Skarzynski PH (2011) Evoked stapedius reflex and compound action potential thresholds versus most comfortable loudness level: assessment of their relation for charge-based fitting strategies in implant users. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec 73(4):189–195. https://doi.org/10.1159/000326892CrossRefPubMed

Title: Anodic Polarity Minimizes Facial Nerve Stimulation as a Side Effect of Cochlear Implantation
Authors: Wiebke S. Konerding
Peter Baumhoff
Andrej Kral
Publication date: 02-12-2022
Publisher: Springer US
Keywords: Nerve Stimulation
Cochlear Implant
Published in: Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology / Issue 1/2023
Print ISSN: 1525-3961
Electronic ISSN: 1438-7573
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10162-022-00878-8

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Anodic Polarity Minimizes Facial Nerve Stimulation as a Side Effect of Cochlear Implantation

Abstract

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2023

Cochlear Health and Cochlear-implant Function

Low Evidence for Tinnitus Risk Factors: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Otolith Membrane Herniation, not Semicircular Canal Duct Dilation, Is Associated with Decreased Caloric Responses in Ménière’s Disease

Electrophysiological and Psychophysical Measures of Temporal Pitch Sensitivity in Normal-hearing Listeners

Informational Masking in Aging and Brain-lesioned Individuals

Vestibular Drop Attacks and Meniere’s Disease as Results of Otolithic Membrane Damage—A Numerical Model