Advances in Cochlear Implant Telemetry: Evoked Neural Responses, Electrical Field Imaging, and Technical Integrity

During the last decade, cochlear implantation has evolved into a well-established treatment of deafness, predominantly because of many improvements in speech processing and the controlled excitation of the auditory nerve. Cochlear implants now also feature telemetry, which is highly useful to monitor the proper functioning of the implanted electronics and electrode contacts. Telemetry can also support the clinical management in young children and difficult cases where neural unresponsiveness is suspected. This article will review recent advances in the telemetry of the electrically evoked compound action potential that have made these measurements simple and routine procedures in most cases. The distribution of the electrical stimulus itself sampled by “electrical field imaging” reveals general patterns of current flow in the normal cochlea and gross abnormalities in individual patients; models have been developed to derive more subtle insights from an individual electrical field imaging. Finally, some thoughts are given to the extended application of telemetry, for example, in monitoring the neural responses or in combination with other treatments of the deaf ear.

[1]  E. Rouiller,et al.  Effect of high-frequency electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve in an animal model of cochlear implants. , 1997, The American journal of otology.

[2]  L. Mens,et al.  Cochlear Implant Generated Surface Potentials: Current Spread and Side Effects , 1994, Ear and hearing.

[3]  P J Abbas,et al.  The Relationship Between EAP and EABR Thresholds and Levels Used to Program the Nucleus 24 Speech Processor: Data from Adults , 2000, Ear and hearing.

[4]  Heather A. Kreft,et al.  Effects of pulse rate on threshold and dynamic range in Clarion cochlear-implant users. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[5]  Intracochlear Potential Distribution with Intracochlear and Extracochlear Electrical Stimulation in Humans , 1991, The Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology.

[6]  Kevin H. Franck,et al.  Electrode Interaction in Pediatric Cochlear Implant Subjects , 2005, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[7]  F. Spelman,et al.  Lumped-parameter model for in vivo cochlear stimulation , 1993, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[8]  Paul J Abbas,et al.  The relation between electrophysiologic channel interaction and electrode pitch ranking in cochlear implant recipients. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  J M Aran,et al.  Acoustically derived auditory nerve action potential evoked by electrical stimulation: an estimation of the waveform of single unit contribution. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[10]  Objective measurements of auditory nerve recovery function in nucleus CI 24 implantees in relation to subjective preference of stimulation rate , 2004, Acta oto-laryngologica.

[11]  Elaine Saunders,et al.  Spatial spread of neural excitation: comparison of compound action potential and forward-masking data in cochlear implant recipients , 2004, International journal of audiology.

[12]  R. Shannon Threshold and loudness functions for pulsatile stimulation of cochlear implants , 1985, Hearing Research.

[13]  G. O'Donoghue,et al.  Intra-operative recordings of electrically evoked auditory nerve action potentials in young children by use of neural response telemetry with the Nucleus CI24M cochlear implant , 2001, British journal of audiology.

[14]  R. Cowan,et al.  Spatial spread of neural excitation in cochlear implant recipients: comparison of improved ECAP method and psychophysical forward masking , 2003, Hearing Research.

[15]  E. Hochmair,et al.  EAP Recordings in Ineraid Patients—Correlations with Psychophysical Measures and Possible Implications for Patient Fitting , 2002, Ear and hearing.

[16]  Johan Frijns,et al.  The Facial Nerve Canal: An Important Cochlear Conduction Path Revealed by Clarion Electrical Field Imaging , 2004, Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology.

[17]  P J Abbas,et al.  Intraoperative measures of electrically evoked auditory nerve compound action potential. , 1994, The American journal of otology.

[18]  T. Liu,et al.  Mandarin Speech Perception in Nucleus CI 24 Implantees Using MAPs Based on Neural Response Telemetry , 2004, ORL.

[19]  Cummings Cw Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol [Suppl]. , 1978 .

[20]  J. Kronenberg,et al.  NRT-BASED VERSUS BEHAVIORAL-BASED MAP: A COMPARISON OF PARAMETERS AND SPEECH PERCEPTION IN YOUNG CHILDREN , 2004, Journal of basic and clinical physiology and pharmacology.

[21]  Paul J. Abbas,et al.  Comparison of EAP Thresholds with MAP Levels in the Nucleus 24 Cochlear Implant: Data from Children , 2000, Ear and hearing.

[22]  S. Mason Electrophysiologic and objective monitoring of the cochlear implant during surgery: implementation, audit and outcomes. , 2004, International journal of audiology.

[23]  G. Clark,et al.  Growth factors, auditory neurones and cochlear implants: a review. , 1999, Acta oto-laryngologica.

[24]  R Schoonhoven,et al.  The prognostic value of electrocochleography in severely hearing-impaired infants. , 1999, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[25]  Hung Thai-Van,et al.  Automatic analysis of auditory nerve electrically evoked compound action potential with an artificial neural network , 2004, Artif. Intell. Medicine.

[26]  L H Mens,et al.  Modelling surface potentials from intracochlear electrical stimulation. , 1999, Scandinavian audiology.

[27]  Johan H M Frijns,et al.  A new method for dealing with the stimulus artefact in electrically evoked compound action potential measurements , 2004, Acta oto-laryngologica.

[28]  R. C. Black,et al.  Current distributions in the cat cochlea: A modelling and electrophysiological study , 1985, Hearing Research.

[29]  Blake C Papsin,et al.  Toward a Battery of Behavioral and Objective Measures to Achieve Optimal Cochlear Implant Stimulation Levels in Children , 2004, Ear and hearing.

[30]  Thomas Lenarz,et al.  Evaluation of the neural response telemetry (NRT) capabilities of the nucleus research platform 8: initial results from the NRT trial. , 2004, International journal of audiology.

[31]  James W. Hall Handbook of Auditory Evoked Responses , 1991 .

[32]  C. Brown Clinical uses of electrically evoked auditory nerve and brainstem responses , 2003, Current opinion in otolaryngology & head and neck surgery.

[33]  N. Dillier,et al.  Normative Findings of Electrically Evoked Compound Action Potential Measurements Using the Neural Response Telemetry of the Nucleus CI24M Cochlear Implant System , 2005, Audiology and Neurotology.

[34]  Caroline D. Buchman,et al.  Cochlear implant soft failures Consensus Development Conference Statement , 2005, Cochlear implants international.

[35]  Rainer Hartmann,et al.  Spatial resolution of cochlear implants: the electrical field and excitation of auditory afferents , 1998, Hearing Research.

[36]  Kevin H. Franck,et al.  The electrically evoked whole-nerve action potential: fitting applications for cochlear implant users , 1999 .

[37]  Johan H. M. Frijns,et al.  Unraveling the electrically evoked compound action potential , 2005, Hearing Research.

[38]  L. Mens,et al.  The Clarion Electrode Positioner: Approximation to the Medial Wall and Current Focussing? , 2003, Audiology and Neurotology.

[39]  Tohru Ifukube,et al.  Current Distributions Produced Inside and Outside the Cochlea from a Scala Tympani Electrode Array , 1987, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[40]  Colette M McKay,et al.  A Different Approach to Using Neural Response Telemetry for Automated Cochlear Implant Processor Programming , 2005, Ear and hearing.

[41]  J. Fayad,et al.  Multichannel Cochlear Implants: Relation of Histopathology to Performance , 2006, The Laryngoscope.

[42]  Helen Cullington,et al.  Cochlear Implants: Objective Measures , 2003 .

[43]  C. Jolly,et al.  Quadrupolar stimulation for cochlear prostheses: modeling and experimental data , 1996, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[44]  P J Abbas,et al.  Electrically evoked whole-nerve action potentials: data from human cochlear implant users. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[45]  Matthijs Killian,et al.  AutoNRTTM: An automated system that measures ECAP thresholds with the Nucleus® FreedomTM cochlear implant via machine intelligence , 2007, Artif. Intell. Medicine.

[46]  Eric Truy,et al.  Modeling the relationship between psychophysical perception and electrically evoked compound action potential threshold in young cochlear implant recipients: clinical implications for implant fitting , 2004, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[47]  S J Norton,et al.  Estimation of Psychophysical Levels Using the Electrically Evoked Compound Action Potential Measured with the Neural Response Telemetry Capabilities of Cochlear Corporation’s CI24M Device , 2001, Ear and hearing.

[48]  Carolyn J Brown,et al.  Speech Perception Using Maps Based on Neural Response Telemetry Measures , 2002, Ear and hearing.

[49]  Guido F. Smoorenburg,et al.  Speech Perception in Nucleus CI24M Cochlear Implant Users with Processor Settings Based on Electrically Evoked Compound Action Potential Thresholds , 2002, Audiology and Neurotology.

[50]  Filiep Vanpoucke,et al.  Identification of the impedance model of an implanted cochlear prosthesis from intracochlear potential measurements , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[51]  R. Altschuler,et al.  Mechanism of electrical stimulation-induced neuroprotection: effects of verapamil on protection of primary auditory afferents , 2003, Brain Research.