Cochlear implant artifact attenuation in late auditory evoked potentials: A single channel approach

Recent evidence suggests that late auditory evoked potentials (LAEP) provide a useful objective metric of performance in cochlear implant (CI) subjects. However, the CI produces a large electrical artifact that contaminates LAEP recordings and confounds their interpretation. Independent component analysis (ICA) has been used in combination with multi-channel recordings to effectively remove the artifact. The applicability of the ICA approach is limited when only single channel data are needed or available, as is often the case in both clinical and research settings. Here we developed a single-channel, high sample rate (125 kHz), and high bandwidth (0-100 kHz) acquisition system to reduce the CI stimulation artifact. We identified two different artifacts in the recording: 1) a high frequency artifact reflecting the stimulation pulse rate, and 2) a direct current (DC, or pedestal) artifact that showed a non-linear time varying relationship to pulse amplitude. This relationship was well described by a bivariate polynomial. The high frequency artifact was completely attenuated by a 35 Hz low-pass filter for all subjects (n = 22). The DC artifact could be caused by an impedance mismatch. For 27% of subjects tested, no DC artifact was observed when electrode impedances were balanced to within 1 kΩ. For the remaining 73% of subjects, the pulse amplitude was used to estimate and then attenuate the DC artifact. Where measurements of pulse amplitude were not available (as with standard low sample rate systems), the DC artifact could be estimated from the stimulus envelope. The present artifact removal approach allows accurate measurement of LAEPs from CI subjects from single channel recordings, increasing their feasibility and utility as an accessible objective measure of CI function.

[1]  Jan Wouters,et al.  Electrically Evoked Auditory Steady State Responses in Cochlear Implant Users , 2010, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[2]  T. Picton,et al.  Evoked potential audiometry. , 1976, The Journal of otolaryngology.

[3]  Q. Fu Temporal processing and speech recognition in cochlear implant users , 2002, Neuroreport.

[4]  Stefan Debener,et al.  Uncovering auditory evoked potentials from cochlear implant users with independent component analysis. , 2011, Psychophysiology.

[5]  N. Kraus,et al.  Neurophysiology of Cochlear Implant Users II: Comparison Among Speech Perception, Dynamic Range, and Physiological Measures , 2002, Ear and hearing.

[6]  C Elberling,et al.  Quality estimation of averaged auditory brainstem responses. , 1984, Scandinavian audiology.

[7]  Fan-Gang Zeng,et al.  Towards a Closed-Loop Cochlear Implant System: Application of Embedded Monitoring of Peripheral and Central Neural Activity , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[8]  Suzanne C. Purdy,et al.  Electrophysiological and speech perception measures of auditory processing in experienced adult cochlear implant users , 2005, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[9]  Fawen Zhang,et al.  The adaptive pattern of the late auditory evoked potential elicited by repeated stimuli in cochlear implant users , 2010, International journal of audiology.

[10]  Jong Ho Won,et al.  Spectral-Ripple Resolution Correlates with Speech Reception in Noise in Cochlear Implant Users , 2007, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[11]  J. Wable,et al.  Mismatch negativity: a tool for the assessment of stimuli discrimination in cochlear implant subjects , 2000, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[12]  Q. Fu,et al.  Mismatch negativity and adaptation measures of the late auditory evoked potential in cochlear implant users , 2011, Hearing Research.

[13]  Belinda A Henry,et al.  Spectral peak resolution and speech recognition in quiet: normal hearing, hearing impaired, and cochlear implant listeners. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  Jan Wouters,et al.  Improved Electrically Evoked Auditory Steady-State Response Thresholds in Humans , 2012, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[15]  Belinda A Henry,et al.  The resolution of complex spectral patterns by cochlear implant and normal-hearing listeners. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[16]  Fan-Gang Zeng,et al.  Cochlear Implants: System Design, Integration, and Evaluation , 2008, IEEE Reviews in Biomedical Engineering.

[17]  Paul J. Abbas,et al.  The clinical application of potentials evoked from the peripheral auditory system , 2008, Hearing Research.

[18]  M. Dorman,et al.  Minimization of cochlear implant stimulus artifact in cortical auditory evoked potentials , 2006, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[19]  T. Picton,et al.  Human auditory sustained potentials. I. The nature of the response. , 1978, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.