Electrically evoked compound action potentials of guinea pig and cat: responses to monopolar, monophasic stimulation

We recorded electrically evoked compound action potentials (EAPs) from guinea pigs and cats using monophasic current pulses delivered by a monopolar intracochlear electrode. By using simple stimuli, we sought results that could shed light on basic excitation properties of the auditory nerve. In these acute experiments, the recording electrode was placed directly on the auditory nerve. Responses to anodic and cathodic stimulus pulses were recorded separately to evaluate stimulus polarity effects. Several polarity-dependent properties were observed. Both EAP morphology and latency were polarity-dependent, with greater latencies for cathodic stimulation. Threshold stimulus level was also polarity-dependent, but in different directions in the two species: cats had lower cathodic thresholds while guinea pigs had lower anodic thresholds. We also observed that the slopes of the EAP amplitude-level functions depended upon stimulus polarity. In most cases where EAP saturation amplitude could be measured, that amplitude was similar for anodic and cathodic stimuli, suggesting that either stimulus polarity can recruit all fibers, or at least a comparable numbers of fibers. The common findings (e.g., EAP morphology and polarity-dependent latency) observed in these two species suggest results that can be extrapolated to responses obtained in humans, while the species-specific findings (e.g., dependence of threshold on polarity) may point to underlying anatomical differences that caution against overgeneralization across species. Some of our observations also bear upon hypotheses of how electrical stimuli may excite different sites on auditory nerve fibers.

[1]  F Rattay,et al.  Ways to approximate current-distance relations for electrically stimulated fibers. , 1987, Journal of theoretical biology.

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

[3]  W M Jenkins,et al.  BIOPHYSICAL CONSIDERATIONS IN ELECTRICAL STIMULATION OF THE AUDITORY NERVOUS SYSTEM a , 1983, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[4]  D. T. Lawson,et al.  New processing strategies in cochlear implantation. , 1995, The American journal of otology.

[5]  J T Rubinstein,et al.  Threshold fluctuations in an N sodium channel model of the node of Ranvier. , 1995, Biophysical journal.

[6]  Charles W. Parkins,et al.  A model of electrical excitation of the mammalian auditory-nerve neuron , 1987, Hearing Research.

[7]  Michael C. Vivion,et al.  Deaf animal models for studies of a multichannel cochlear prosthesis , 1982, Hearing Research.

[8]  P. Stypulkowski,et al.  Physiological properties of the electrically stimulated auditory nerve. II. Single fiber recordings , 1984, Hearing Research.

[9]  P. Stypulkowski,et al.  Temporal response patterns of single auditory nerve fibers elicited by periodic electrical stimuli , 1987, Hearing Research.

[10]  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.

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

[12]  S. B. Brummer,et al.  Electrochemical Considerations for Safe Electrical Stimulation of the Nervous System with Platinum Electrodes , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[13]  Paul J. Abbas,et al.  The Neurophysiological Eects of Simulated Auditory Prosthesis Stimulation , 1997 .

[14]  Charles C. Finley,et al.  Models of Neural Responsiveness to Electrical Stimulation , 1990 .

[15]  Charles A. Miller,et al.  Functional responses from guinea pigs with cochlear implants. I. Electrophysiological and psychophysical measures , 1995, Hearing Research.

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

[17]  S. B. Brummer,et al.  Electrical Stimulation with Pt Electrodes: II-Estimation of Maximum Surface Redox (Theoretical Non-Gassing) Limits , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[18]  D. W. Smith,et al.  Effects of electrode configuration on psychophysical strength-duration functions for single biphasic electrical stimuli in cats. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.