Summary of results using the nucleus CI24M implant to record the electrically evoked compound action potential.

OBJECTIVE This study outlines a series of experiments using the neural response telemetry (NRT) system of the Nucleus CI24M cochlear implant to measure the electrically evoked compound action potential (EAP). The goal of this investigation was to develop a protocol that allows successful recording of the EAP in a majority of CI24M cochlear implant users. DESIGN Twenty-six postlingually deafened adults participated in this study. A series of experiments were conducted that allowed us to examine how manipulation of stimulation and recording parameters may affect the morphology of the EAP recorded using the Nucleus NRT system. RESULTS Results of this study show consistent responses on at least some electrodes from all subjects. Cross-subject and cross electrode variations in both the growth of the response and the temporal refractory properties of the response were observed. The range of stimulus and recording parameters that can be used to record the EAP with the Nucleus NRT system is described. CONCLUSIONS Using the protocol outlined in this study, it is possible to reliably record EAP responses from most subjects and for most electrodes in Nucleus CI24M cochlear implant users. These responses are robust and recording these responses does not require that the subject sleep or remain still. Based on these results, a specific protocol is proposed for measurement of the EAP using the NRT system of the CI24M cochlear implant. Potential clinical implications of these results are discussed.

[1]  The neurophysiological evaluation of auditory discrimination. , 1995, Ear and hearing.

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

[3]  P J Abbas,et al.  Electrically evoked whole nerve action potentials in Ineraid cochlear implant users: responses to different stimulating electrode configurations and comparison to psychophysical responses. , 1996, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[4]  P J Abbas,et al.  Longitudinal Assessment of Physiological and Psychophysical Measures in Cochlear Implant Users , 1995, Ear and hearing.

[5]  Carolyn J. Brown,et al.  Electrically evoked auditory brainstem response: Refractory properties and strength-duration functions , 1991, Hearing Research.

[6]  P J Abbas,et al.  Preliminary experience with neural response telemetry in the nucleus CI24M cochlear implant. , 1998, The American journal of otology.

[7]  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.

[8]  J. Shallop,et al.  Prediction of Behavioral Threshold and Comfort Values for Nucleus 22-Channel Implant Patients from Electrical Auditory Brain Stem Response Test Results , 1991, The Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology.

[9]  P R Kileny,et al.  Use of electrophysiologic measures in the management of children with cochlear implants: brainstem, middle latency, and cognitive (P300) responses. , 1991, The American journal of otology.

[10]  S. Telian,et al.  Electrically evoked auditory brain-stem response in pediatric patients with cochlear implants. , 1994, Archives of otolaryngology--head & neck surgery.

[11]  P. Stypulkowski,et al.  Characterization of the electrically evoked auditory brainstem response (ABR) in cats and humans , 1986, Hearing Research.

[12]  M. Lutman,et al.  Application of intraoperative recordings of electrically evoked ABRs in a paediatric cochlear implant programme. Nottingham Paediatric Cochlear Implant Group. , 1993, Advances in oto-rhino-laryngology.

[13]  P J Abbas,et al.  Electrically evoked whole-nerve action potentials: parametric data from the cat. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  T. Carrell,et al.  The mismatch negativity cortical evoked potential elicited by speech in cochlear-implant users , 1993, Hearing Research.

[15]  P. Stypulkowski,et al.  Physiological properties of the electrically stimulated auditory nerve. I. Compound action potential recordings , 1984, Hearing Research.

[16]  R A Ruth,et al.  Electric auditory brain-stem responses in nucleus multichannel cochlear implant users. , 1994, Archives of otolaryngology--head & neck surgery.

[17]  P. Kileny,et al.  Electrically evoked middle-latency auditory potentials in cochlear implant candidates. , 1987, Archives of otolaryngology--head & neck surgery.

[18]  B S Wilson,et al.  The future of cochlear implants. , 1997, British journal of audiology.

[19]  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.

[20]  Carolyn J. Brown,et al.  Electrically evoked auditory brainstem response: Growth of response with current level , 1991, Hearing Research.

[21]  Paul J. Abbas,et al.  Intraoperative and Postoperative Electrically Evoked Auditory Brain Stem Responses in Nucleus Cochlear Implant Users: Implications for the Fitting Process , 1994, Ear and hearing.

[22]  A. Beiter,et al.  Electrically evoked auditory brain stem responses (EABR) and middle latency responses (EMLR) obtained from patients with the nucleus multichannel cochlear implant. , 1990, Ear and hearing.