Objective Assessment of Spectral Ripple Discrimination in Cochlear Implant Listeners Using Cortical Evoked Responses to an Oddball Paradigm

Cochlear implants (CIs) can partially restore functional hearing in deaf individuals. However, multiple factors affect CI listener's speech perception, resulting in large performance differences. Non-speech based tests, such as spectral ripple discrimination, measure acoustic processing capabilities that are highly correlated with speech perception. Currently spectral ripple discrimination is measured using standard psychoacoustic methods, which require attentive listening and active response that can be difficult or even impossible in special patient populations. Here, a completely objective cortical evoked potential based method is developed and validated to assess spectral ripple discrimination in CI listeners. In 19 CI listeners, using an oddball paradigm, cortical evoked potential responses to standard and inverted spectrally rippled stimuli were measured. In the same subjects, psychoacoustic spectral ripple discrimination thresholds were also measured. A neural discrimination threshold was determined by systematically increasing the number of ripples per octave and determining the point at which there was no longer a significant difference between the evoked potential response to the standard and inverted stimuli. A correlation was found between the neural and the psychoacoustic discrimination thresholds (R2 = 0.60, p<0.01). This method can objectively assess CI spectral resolution performance, providing a potential tool for the evaluation and follow-up of CI listeners who have difficulty performing psychoacoustic tests, such as pediatric or new users.

[1]  P. Loizou Introduction to cochlear implants. , 1999, IEEE engineering in medicine and biology magazine : the quarterly magazine of the Engineering in Medicine & Biology Society.

[2]  R. Näätänen,et al.  The mismatch negativity (MMN) – A unique window to disturbed central auditory processing in ageing and different clinical conditions , 2012, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[3]  H. Levitt Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. , 1971, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  Carolyn J. Brown,et al.  The Electrically Evoked Auditory Change Complex: Preliminary Results from Nucleus Cochlear Implant Users , 2008, Ear and hearing.

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

[6]  S. Waltzman,et al.  Cochlear Implantation in Children Younger Than 12 Months , 2005, Pediatrics.

[7]  David B Pisoni,et al.  Individual Differences in Effectiveness of Cochlear Implants in Children Who Are Prelingually Deaf: New Process Measures of Performance. , 1999, The Volta review.

[8]  Jong Ho Won,et al.  Relationship Between Behavioral and Physiological Spectral-Ripple Discrimination , 2011, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[9]  Xin Luo,et al.  Current Steering with Partial Tripolar Stimulation Mode in Cochlear Implants , 2013, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

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

[12]  Carolyn J Brown,et al.  Electrically evoked brainstem potentials in cochlear implant patients with multi-electrode stimulation , 1988, Hearing Research.

[13]  J. Eggermont,et al.  Integrated mismatch negativity (MMNi): a noise-free representation of evoked responses allowing single-point distribution-free statistical tests. , 1997, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[14]  J. Eggermont,et al.  Maturation of Human Cortical Auditory Function: Differences Between Normal‐Hearing Children and Children with Cochlear Implants , 1996, Ear and hearing.

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

[16]  H. Dillon,et al.  An international comparison of long‐term average speech spectra , 1994 .

[17]  T. Picton,et al.  A method for removing cochlear implant artifact , 2010, Hearing Research.

[18]  Anthony J Spahr,et al.  Relationship between perception of spectral ripple and speech recognition in cochlear implant and vocoder listeners. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[19]  L. Trainor,et al.  Changes in auditory cortex and the development of mismatch negativity between 2 and 6 months of age. , 2003, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[20]  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.

[21]  Dan Gnansia,et al.  Speech perception performance for 100 post-lingually deaf adults fitted with Neurelec cochlear implants: Comparison between Digisonic® Convex and Digisonic® SP devices after a 1-year follow-up , 2010, Acta oto-laryngologica.

[22]  Terence W Picton,et al.  Auditory Steady-State Responses and Word Recognition Scores in Normal-Hearing and Hearing-Impaired Adults , 2004, Ear and hearing.

[23]  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.

[24]  Vladimir V Popov,et al.  Frequency-temporal resolution of hearing measured by rippled noise , 1997, Hearing Research.

[25]  A. Faulkner,et al.  Cortical processing of musical sounds in children with Cochlear Implants , 2012, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[26]  Michael Dorman,et al.  Cortical development, plasticity and re-organization in children with cochlear implants. , 2009, Journal of communication disorders.

[27]  Jong Ho Won,et al.  Relationship between channel interaction and spectral-ripple discrimination in cochlear implant users. , 2011, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[28]  S J Norton,et al.  Estimation of Psychophysical Levels Using the Electrically Evoked Compound Action Potential Measured with the Neural Response Telemetry Capabilities of Cochlear Corporation’s CI24M Device , 2001, Ear and hearing.

[29]  L H Mens,et al.  Predictors of cochlear implant performance. , 1999, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[30]  Fan-Gang Zeng,et al.  Cochlear-implant spatial selectivity with monopolar, bipolar and tripolar stimulation , 2012, Hearing Research.

[31]  T. Picton,et al.  Mismatch Negativity: Different Water in the Same River , 2000, Audiology and Neurotology.

[32]  Fan-Gang Zeng,et al.  Speech dynamic range and its effect on cochlear implant performance. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

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

[35]  Daniel D. E. Wong,et al.  Beamformer Suppression of Cochlear Implant Artifacts in an Electroencephalography Dataset , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[36]  J. Eggermont,et al.  Maturation of the Mismatch Negativity: Effects of Profound Deafness and Cochlear Implant Use , 2000, Audiology and Neurotology.

[37]  R. Shannon,et al.  Speech recognition in noise as a function of the number of spectral channels: comparison of acoustic hearing and cochlear implants. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[38]  M. Dorman,et al.  Cortical reorganization in children with cochlear implants , 2008, Brain Research.

[39]  F. Zeng Trends in Cochlear Implants , 2004, Trends in amplification.

[40]  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.

[41]  David M. Landsberger,et al.  Virtual channel discrimination is improved by current focusing in cochlear implant recipients , 2009, Hearing Research.

[42]  C Pantev,et al.  Dynamics of auditory plasticity after cochlear implantation: a longitudinal study. , 2006, Cerebral cortex.

[43]  L Whitford,et al.  Factors affecting auditory performance of postlinguistically deaf adults using cochlear implants. , 1996, Audiology & neuro-otology.

[44]  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.

[45]  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.

[46]  Fan-Gang Zeng,et al.  Cochlear implant artifact attenuation in late auditory evoked potentials: A single channel approach , 2013, Hearing Research.

[47]  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.

[48]  R Näätänen,et al.  Maturation of mismatch negativity in infants. , 1998, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[49]  H. Francis,et al.  Cochlear Implant Rehabilitation in Older Adults: Literature Review and Proposal of a Conceptual Framework , 2012, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society.

[50]  Laurel J. Trainor,et al.  Maturation of cortical mismatch responses to occasional pitch change in early infancy: Effects of presentation rate and magnitude of change , 2009, Neuropsychologia.