Threshold, Comfortable Level and Impedance Changes as a Function of Electrode-Modiolar Distance

Objective The study investigated the hypothesis that threshold and comfortable levels recorded from cochlear implant patients would reduce, and dynamic range increase, as distance of the electrode from the modiolar wall (radial distance) decreases. Two groups of cochlear implant patients participated; one group using the Nucleus® 24 Contour™ electrode array, and one group using the Nucleus standard straight (banded) array. The Nucleus 24 Contour array has been shown in temporal bone studies to lie closer to the modiolus than the banded array. The relationship of electrode impedance and radial distance is also investigated. Design The study, conducted at three centers, evaluated 21 patients using the Contour array, and 36 patients using the banded array. For each patient, threshold, comfortable levels and dynamic range were measured at four time points. Common ground electrode impedance was recorded clinically from each patient, at time intervals up to 12 wk. An estimate of the radial distance of the electrode from the modiolus was made by analysis of Cochlear view x-rays. Results Threshold and comfortable levels were significantly lower for the Nucleus 24 Contour array than for the banded array. However, dynamic range measurements did not show the predicted increase. In a majority of subjects, a significant correlation was found between the estimated radial distance of the electrode from the modiolus and the measured threshold and comfortable levels. This trend was not observed for dynamic range. The analysis indicates that other factors than radial distance are involved in the resultant psychophysical levels. Clinical impedance measures (common ground) were found to be significantly higher for the Contour array. However, the electrodes on the Contour array are half-rings, which are approximately only half the geometric size of the full rings as electrodes of the standard array. When the geometric electrode area in the two array designs are normalized, the trends in the electrode impedance behavior are similar. Conclusions The results support the hypothesis that the relationship between the radial distance of the electrode and the psychophysical measures are influenced by patterns of fibrous tissue growth and individual patient differences, such as etiology and neural survival. Impedance measures for the Nucleus 24 Contour electrode array were higher than the banded electrode array, but this is primarily due to the reduction in electrode surface area. The different outcomes in impedance over time suggest differences in the relative contributions of the components of impedance with the two arrays.

[1]  N. Cohen,et al.  Electrode to modiolus proximity: a fluoroscopic and histologic analysis. , 2000, The American journal of otology.

[2]  G M Clark,et al.  Cochlear view: postoperative radiography for cochlear implantation. , 2000, The American journal of otology.

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

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

[5]  G M Clark,et al.  Improved and simplified methods for specifying positions of the electrode bands of a cochlear implant array. , 1996, The American journal of otology.

[6]  D W Kennedy,et al.  Multichannel intracochlear electrodes: Mechanism of insertion trauma , 1987, The Laryngoscope.

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

[8]  Elaine Saunders,et al.  Psychophysics of a prototype peri-modiolar cochlear implant electrode array , 2001, Hearing Research.

[9]  G M Clark,et al.  The Contour Electrode Array: Safety Study and Initial Patient Trials of a New Perimodiolar Design , 2001, Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology.

[10]  R. Schoonhoven,et al.  Potential distributions and neural excitation patterns in a rotationally symmetric model of the electrically stimulated cochlea , 1995, Hearing Research.

[11]  R. L. Webb,et al.  Banded Intracochlear Electrode Array: Evaluation of Insertion Trauma in Human Temporal Bones , 1985, The Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology.

[12]  G M Clark,et al.  Comparison of electrode position in the human cochlea using various perimodiolar electrode arrays. , 2000, The American journal of otology.

[13]  Antje Aschendorff,et al.  The Nucleus Contour Electrode Array: A Radiological and Histological Study , 2001, The Laryngoscope.

[14]  Graeme M. Clark,et al.  A new pre-curved electrode array benefits as measured by initial psychophysics [Abstract] , 1998 .

[15]  Graeme M. Clark,et al.  Factors Predicting Postoperative Sentence Scores in Postlinguistically Deaf Adult Cochlear Implant Patients , 1992, The Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology.