Automatic selection of the active electrode set for image-guided cochlear implant programming

Abstract. Cochlear implants (CIs) are neural prostheses that restore hearing by stimulating auditory nerve pathways within the cochlea using an implanted electrode array. Research has shown when multiple electrodes stimulate the same nerve pathways, competing stimulation occurs and hearing outcomes decline. Recent clinical studies have indicated that hearing outcomes can be significantly improved by using an image-guided active electrode set selection technique we have designed, in which electrodes that cause competing stimulation are identified and deactivated. In tests done to date, an expert is needed to perform the electrode selection step with the assistance of a method to visualize the spatial relationship between electrodes and neural sites determined using image analysis techniques. We propose to automate the electrode selection step by optimizing a cost function that captures the heuristics used by the expert. Further, we propose an approach to estimate the values of parameters used in the cost function using an existing database of expert electrode selections. We test this method with different electrode array models from three manufacturers. Our automatic approach generates acceptable active electrode sets in 98.3% of the subjects tested. This approach represents a crucial step toward clinical translation of our image-guided CI programming system.

[1]  William M. Rabinowitz,et al.  Better speech recognition with cochlear implants , 1991, Nature.

[2]  Qian-Jie Fu,et al.  Noise Susceptibility of Cochlear Implant Users: The Role of Spectral Resolution and Smearing , 2005, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[3]  D. D. Greenwood A cochlear frequency-position function for several species--29 years later. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  Margaret W. Skinner,et al.  In Vivo Estimates of the Position of Advanced Bionics Electrode Arrays in the Human Cochlea , 2007 .

[5]  Benoit M Dawant,et al.  Assessment of Electrode Placement and Audiological Outcomes in Bilateral Cochlear Implantation , 2011, Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology.

[6]  Benoit M. Dawant,et al.  Image-Guidance Enables New Methods for Customizing Cochlear Implant Stimulation Strategies , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[7]  Benoit M Dawant,et al.  Impact of electrode design and surgical approach on scalar location and cochlear implant outcomes , 2014, The Laryngoscope.

[8]  Benoit M. Dawant,et al.  Statistical Shape Model Segmentation and Frequency Mapping of Cochlear Implant Stimulation Targets in CT , 2012, MICCAI.

[9]  Benoit M. Dawant,et al.  Automatic Graph-Based Localization of Cochlear Implant Electrodes in CT , 2015, MICCAI.

[10]  Jay T Rubinstein,et al.  How cochlear implants encode speech , 2004, Current opinion in otolaryngology & head and neck surgery.

[11]  Thomas Klenzner,et al.  Quality Control after Cochlear Implant Surgery by Means of Rotational Tomography , 2005, Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology.

[12]  Marco Pelizzone,et al.  Electrical field interactions in different cochlear implant systems. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[13]  Benoit M. Dawant,et al.  Automatic Localization of Cochlear Implant Electrodes in CT , 2014, MICCAI.

[14]  Johan H M Frijns,et al.  Multisection CT as a valuable tool in the postoperative assessment of cochlear implant patients. , 2005, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[15]  Benoit M. Dawant,et al.  Clinical Evaluation of an Image-Guided Cochlear Implant Programming Strategy , 2014, Audiology and Neurotology.