Perceptual Interactions Between Electrodes Using Focused and Monopolar Cochlear Stimulation

被引:25
|
作者
Marozeau, Jeremy [1 ,2 ]
McDermott, Hugh J. [1 ,3 ]
Swanson, Brett A. [4 ]
McKay, Colette M. [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Bion Inst, Melbourne, Australia
[2] Tech Univ Denmark, Hearing Syst Grp, DK-2800 Lyngby, Denmark
[3] Univ Melbourne, Dept Med Bion, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[4] Cochlear Ltd, Sydney, NSW, Australia
来源
JARO-JOURNAL OF THE ASSOCIATION FOR RESEARCH IN OTOLARYNGOLOGY | 2015年 / 16卷 / 03期
关键词
cochlear implant; psychophysics; stimulation strategies; electrical field; PSYCHOPHYSICAL TUNING CURVES; ELECTRICAL-STIMULATION; IMPLANT USERS; CHANNEL INTERACTION; PLACE SPECIFICITY; SPEECH-PERCEPTION; AUDITORY-NERVE; TRIPOLAR; HEARING; NOISE;
D O I
10.1007/s10162-015-0511-2
中图分类号
Q189 [神经科学];
学科分类号
071006 ;
摘要
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.
引用
收藏
页码:401 / 412
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [11] Dynamic Current Focusing Compared to Monopolar Stimulation in a Take-Home Trial of Cochlear Implant Users
    van Groesen, Nicolaas Roelof Arnoldus
    Briaire, Jeroen Johannes
    de Jong, Monique Anna Maria
    Frijns, Johannes Hubertus Maria
    EAR AND HEARING, 2023, 44 (02) : 306 - 317
  • [12] Intra-cochlear differences in the spread of excitation between biphasic and triphasic pulse stimulation in cochlear implants: A modeling and experimental study
    Herrmann, David P.
    Kalkman, Randy K.
    Frijns, Johan H. M.
    Bahmer, Andreas
    HEARING RESEARCH, 2023, 432
  • [13] Role of bimodal stimulation for auditory-perceptual skills development in children with a unilateral cochlear implant
    Marsella, P.
    Giannantonio, S.
    Scorpecci, A.
    Pianesi, F.
    Micardi, M.
    Resca, A.
    ACTA OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGICA ITALICA, 2015, 35 (06) : 442 - 448
  • [14] The perception of complex pitch in cochlear implants: A comparison of monopolar and tripolar stimulation
    Fielden, Claire A.
    Kluk, Karolina
    Boyle, Patrick J.
    Mckay, Colette M.
    JOURNAL OF THE ACOUSTICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA, 2015, 138 (04) : 2524 - 2536
  • [15] Evaluation of focused multipolar stimulation for cochlear implants in acutely deafened cats
    George, Shefin S.
    Wise, Andrew K.
    Shivdasani, Mohit N.
    Shepherd, Robert K.
    Fallon, James B.
    JOURNAL OF NEURAL ENGINEERING, 2014, 11 (06)
  • [16] The Intensity-pitch Relation Revisited: Monopolar Versus Bipolar Cochlear Stimulation
    Arnoldner, Christoph
    Riss, Dorninik
    Kaider, Alexandra
    Mair, Alois
    Wagenblast, Jens
    Baumgartner, Wolf-Dieter
    Gstoettner, Wolfgang
    Hamzavi, Jafar-Sasan
    LARYNGOSCOPE, 2008, 118 (09) : 1630 - 1636
  • [17] The perceptual effects of interphase gap duration in cochlear implant stimulation
    McKay, CM
    Henshall, KR
    HEARING RESEARCH, 2003, 181 (1-2) : 94 - 99
  • [18] Perceptual learning of pitch provided by cochlear implant stimulation rate
    Bissmeyer, Susan R. S.
    Hossain, Shaikat
    Goldsworthy, Raymond L.
    PLOS ONE, 2020, 15 (12):
  • [19] Interactions between pulse separation and pulse polarity order in cochlear implants
    Miller, AL
    Morris, DJ
    Pfingst, BE
    HEARING RESEARCH, 1997, 109 (1-2) : 21 - 33
  • [20] Perceptual learning and nonword repetition using a cochlear implant simulation
    Burkholder, R
    Pisoni, D
    Svirsky, M
    COCHLEAR IMPLANTS, 2004, 1273 : 208 - 211