A Longitudinal Study of Electrode Impedance, the Electrically Evoked Compound Action Potential, and Behavioral Measures in Nucleus 24 Cochlear Implant Users

Objective The primary goal of this study was to examine changes that may occur in electrode impedance, electrically evoked compound action potential (EAP) threshold and slope of the EAP growth function, and behavioral measures of threshold (MAP T-level) and maximum comfort (C-level) over time in both adult and child cochlear implant users. Secondary goals were to determine whether changes in these measures are consistent between children and adults, and to determine whether behavioral measures (MAP T- and C-levels) and electrophysiologic measures (EAP thresholds) exhibit the same trends over time. Design Thirty-five children and 33 adults implanted with the Nucleus CI24M between November 1996 and August 1999 participated in this study. Subjects were included in this study if 1) they had used their implant for at least 1 yr after device connection, and 2) they had participated in the necessary data collection at a minimum number of the time intervals assessed in this study. EAP threshold, slope of the EAP growth function, and common ground electrode impedance measures were collected intraoperatively, at initial stimulation, and at several subsequent visits up to 2 yr post initial stimulation. MAP T- and C-levels were measured at initial stimulation and at the same time intervals as described above. Results Changes in electrode impedance, EAP thresholds, and slope of the EAP growth function from measures made intraoperatively, at initial stimulation, and at 1 to 2 mo post initial stimulation were similar in both children and adults. Beyond the 1- to 2-mo visit, children exhibited significant increases in electrode impedance, EAP thresholds, slope, and MAP T-levels, whereas these same measures in adults remained relatively stable. EAP thresholds in children stabilized by the 3- to 8-mo visit, and electrode impedance stabilized by the 6- to 8-mo visit, while slope of the EAP growth function, MAP T-levels, and MAP C-levels were stable by 1 yr post initial stimulation. C-levels in adults increased up to 1 yr post initial stimulation; however, the amount of increase was much smaller than that seen in children. In both children and adults, longitudinal trends in EAP thresholds mirrored T-level more closely than C-level. Conclusions The results of this study suggest that peripheral changes occur in many children that do not generally occur in adults within the first year of cochlear implant use. One implication of these results is that if EAP thresholds are to be used to assist in programming the speech processor for children, it is best to make those measures at the same time interval as device programming rather than using measures made intraoperatively or at the initial programming session to set MAP levels at later visits.

[1]  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.

[2]  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.

[3]  Li Li,et al.  Does electrical stimulation of deaf cochleae prevent spiral ganglion degeneration? , 1999, Hearing Research.

[4]  J K Shallop,et al.  Summary of results using the nucleus CI24M implant to record the electrically evoked compound action potential. , 1999, Ear and hearing.

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

[6]  D T Lawson,et al.  Temporal representations with cochlear implants. , 1997, The American journal of otology.

[7]  R. Shepherd,et al.  Chronic electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve at high stimulus rates: a physiological and histopathological study , 1997, Hearing Research.

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

[9]  S. Waltzman,et al.  Changes in electrical thresholds over time in young children implanted with the Nucleus cochlear prosthesis. , 1995, The Annals of otology, rhinology & laryngology. Supplement.

[10]  G M Clark,et al.  Cochlear implantation: osteoneogenesis, electrode-tissue impedance, and residual hearing. , 1995, The Annals of otology, rhinology & laryngology. Supplement.

[11]  P Seligman,et al.  Architecture of the Spectra 22 speech processor. , 1995, The Annals of otology, rhinology & laryngology. Supplement.

[12]  G. M. Clark,et al.  Cochlear pathology following chronic electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve: II deafened kittens , 1994, Hearing Research.

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

[14]  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.

[15]  M F Dorman,et al.  Long-term measures of electrode impedance and auditory thresholds for the Ineraid cochlear implant. , 1992, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[16]  R. Shepherd,et al.  Cochlear pathology following chronic electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve. I: Normal hearing kittens , 1992, Hearing Research.

[17]  S. Waltzman,et al.  Effects of Chronic Electrical Stimulation on Patients using a Cochlear Prosthesis , 1991, Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.

[18]  Bryan E Pfingst,et al.  Changes over time in thresholds for electrical stimulation of the cochlea , 1990, Hearing Research.

[19]  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.

[20]  R J Nozza,et al.  Infant speech-sound discrimination testing: effects of stimulus intensity and procedural model on measures of performance. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  S. Waltzman,et al.  Long‐Term effects of multichannel cochlear implant usage , 1986, The Laryngoscope.

[22]  D. Eddington,et al.  Speech Recognition Experience with Multichannel Cochlear Implants , 1985, Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.

[23]  S. Walsh,et al.  Chronic electrical stimulation of auditory nerve in cat: Physiological and histological results , 1982, Hearing Research.

[24]  S. B. Brummer,et al.  Electrical Stimulation with Pt Electrodes: AMethod for Determination of "Real" Electrode Areas , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[25]  C. Kischer,et al.  The histiotypic organization of the hypertrophic scar in humans. , 1972, The Journal of investigative dermatology.

[26]  G M Clark,et al.  Intracochlear factors contributing to psychophysical percepts following cochlear implantation. , 1998, Acta oto-laryngologica.

[27]  S Peeters,et al.  New developments in cochlear implants. , 1998, Acta oto-rhino-laryngologica Belgica.

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

[29]  R J Nozza,et al.  Infant-adult differences in unmasked thresholds for the discrimination of consonant-vowel syllable pairs. , 1991, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.