Electrically Evoked Auditory Brain Stem Responses for Lateral and Medial Placement of the Clarion HiFocus Electrode

Objective The purpose of this study was to compare the electrically evoked auditory brain stem response (EABR) for lateral and medial placement of the Clarion HiFocus cochlear implant electrode array via the electrode positioning system (EPS). Design Twenty-five adult and pediatric cochlear implant recipients participated in the study. Intraoperatively recorded EABRs were evoked by stimuli via three intracochlear electrodes representing apical, medial, and basal locations, and responses were elicited before and after positioner insertion. Evoked potential measures of wave V amplitude and threshold were examined for statistical significance using ANOVA for repeated measures and Chi-Square methods. Results For a given supra-threshold stimulus level, the increase in EABR wave V amplitude was significantly larger after EPS placement compared to before EPS placement for electrodes 1 (apical) and 13 (basal). Likewise, when the stimulus was decreased to obtain a minimal amplitude, the wave V threshold was significantly lower after EPS placement for electrodes 7 (medial) and 13. The number of measurements that showed decreased wave V threshold after EPS insertion was significantly dependent on intracochlear electrode location. Conclusions Placement of the Clarion Electrode Positioning System following HiFocus electrode insertion resulted in a reduction in the electrical current required to activate the auditory system. The effect of the EPS was greatest for the basal location, demonstrated by lower wave V thresholds and a larger percentage increase in wave V amplitude. The EABR reflected electrophysiologic changes relative to lateral-to-medial changes in intracochlear electrode position due to the EPS.

[1]  J. Frijns,et al.  Spatial selectivity in a rotationally symmetric model of the electrically stimulated cochlea , 1996, Hearing Research.

[2]  Nina Kraus,et al.  Neurophysiology of Cochlear Implant Users I: Effects of Stimulus Current Level and Electrode Site on the Electrical ABR, MLR, and N1-P2 Response , 2002, Ear and hearing.

[3]  G. M. Clark,et al.  Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve: The effect of electrode position on neural excitation , 1993, Hearing Research.

[4]  J. J. Grote,et al.  The Importance of Human Cochlear Anatomy for the Results of Modiolus-Hugging Multichannel Cochlear Implants , 2001, Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology.

[5]  Mary Jane Mahoney,et al.  The Use of Averaged Electrode Voltages to Assess the Function of Nucleus Internal Cochlear Implant Devices in Children , 1994, Ear and hearing.

[6]  Carolyn J. Brown,et al.  Relationship between Eabr Thresholds and Levels Used to Program the Clarion® Speech Processor , 1999, The Annals of otology, rhinology & laryngology. Supplement.

[7]  R. Schoonhoven,et al.  Potential distributions and neural excitation patterns in a rotationally symmetric model of the electrically stimulated cochlea , 1995, Hearing Research.

[8]  Jeroen J. Briaire,et al.  Initial Evaluation of the Clarion CII Cochlear Implant: Speech Perception and Neural Response Imaging , 2002, Ear and hearing.

[9]  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.

[10]  M. Novak,et al.  Electrically Evoked Potentials Recorded in Adult and Pediatric Clarion® Implant Users , 1999, The Annals of otology, rhinology & laryngology. Supplement.

[11]  A. Hodges,et al.  Novel Intracochlear Electrode Positioner: Effects on Electrode Position , 2000, The Annals of otology, rhinology & laryngology. Supplement.

[12]  M F Dorman,et al.  The recognition of sentences in noise by normal-hearing listeners using simulations of cochlear-implant signal processors with 6-20 channels. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[13]  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.

[14]  Q J Fu,et al.  Effects of noise and spectral resolution on vowel and consonant recognition: acoustic and electric hearing. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

[16]  M. Waring Intraoperative electrophysiologic monitoring to assist placement of auditory brain stem implant. , 1995, The Annals of otology, rhinology & laryngology. Supplement.