Effects of Stimulus Duration on Event-Related Potentials Recorded From Cochlear-Implant Users

Objectives: Several studies have investigated the feasibility of using electrophysiology as an objective tool to efficiently map cochlear implants. A pervasive problem when measuring event-related potentials is the need to remove the direct-current (DC) artifact produced by the cochlear implant. Here, we describe how DC artifact removal can corrupt the response waveform and how the appropriate choice of stimulus duration may minimize this corruption. Design: Event-related potentials were recorded to a synthesized vowel /a/ with a 170- or 400-ms duration. Results: The P2 response, which occurs between 150 and 250 ms, was corrupted by the DC artifact removal algorithm for a 170-ms stimulus duration but was relatively uncorrupted for a 400-ms stimulus duration. Conclusions: To avoid response waveform corruption from DC artifact removal, one should choose a stimulus duration such that the offset of the stimulus does not temporally coincide with the specific peak of interest. While our data have been analyzed with only one specific algorithm, we argue that the length of the stimulus may be a critical factor for any DC artifact removal algorithm.

[1]  Dennis H. Klatt,et al.  Software for a cascade/parallel formant synthesizer , 1980 .

[2]  René H. Gifford,et al.  Speech Recognition Materials and Ceiling Effects: Considerations for Cochlear Implant Programs , 2008, Audiology and Neurotology.

[3]  G. Pfurtscheller,et al.  A fully automated correction method of EOG artifacts in EEG recordings , 2007, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[4]  R. V. Shannon,et al.  Evoked cortical activity and speech recognition as a function of the number of simulated cochlear implant channels , 2009, Clinical Neurophysiology.

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

[6]  Fan-Gang Zeng,et al.  Objective Assessment of Spectral Ripple Discrimination in Cochlear Implant Listeners Using Cortical Evoked Responses to an Oddball Paradigm , 2014, PloS one.

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

[8]  Arnaud Delorme,et al.  EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis , 2004, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[9]  R. Shepherd,et al.  Maturation of the cortical auditory evoked potential in infants and young children , 2006, Hearing Research.

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

[11]  P. Souza,et al.  Effects of age and age-related hearing loss on the neural representation of speech cues , 2003, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[12]  B. Papsin,et al.  Balancing current levels in children with bilateral cochlear implants using electrophysiological and behavioral measures , 2016, Hearing Research.

[13]  P. Abbas,et al.  Peripheral and Central Contributions to Cortical Responses in Cochlear Implant Users , 2015, Ear and hearing.

[14]  S. Debener,et al.  Rapid bilateral improvement in auditory cortex activity in postlingually deafened adults following cochlear implantation , 2015, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[15]  Maarten De Vos,et al.  Semi-automatic attenuation of cochlear implant artifacts for the evaluation of late auditory evoked potentials , 2012, Hearing Research.

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