Practical model description of peripheral neural excitation in cochlear implant recipients: 3. ECAP during bursts and loudness as function of burst duration

In this, the third paper of the series, the loudness of low-rate bursts of electrical pulses was measured as a function of the burst duration, in subjects implanted with the Nucleus 24 cochlear implant system (three with straight and two with Contour electrode arrays). In order to help distinguish between the contributions of peripheral and more central effects, the ECAP was recorded to the individual pulses comprising the bursts, using the Neural Response Telemetry (NRT) system. At a pulse rate of 250 pulses/s, the ECAP amplitude did not decrease greatly during the bursts: the mean reduction factor was 0.89. The time-constant for summation of the loudness contributions from the pulses comprising a burst was found to be larger than that associated with normal hearing. In addition, the first pulse of a pulse train was found to contribute much more to the overall loudness than did the subsequent pulses, although a corresponding difference was not observed in the ECAP recordings. These results establish a necessary connection between the essentially single-pulse model, developed in the fourth and fifth papers of the series, and the psychophysical data for pulse bursts, but they also have broader implications.

[1]  Colette M McKay,et al.  A practical method of predicting the loudness of complex electrical stimuli. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  Lawrence T. Cohen,et al.  Practical model description of peripheral neural excitation in cochlear implant recipients: 2. Spread of the effective stimulation field (ESF), from ECAP and FEA , 2009, Hearing Research.

[3]  R. Cowan,et al.  Spatial spread of neural excitation in cochlear implant recipients: comparison of improved ECAP method and psychophysical forward masking , 2003, Hearing Research.

[4]  H J McDermott,et al.  Loudness perception with pulsatile electrical stimulation: the effect of interpulse intervals. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[5]  W. S. Rhode,et al.  Encoding timing and intensity in the ventral cochlear nucleus of the cat. , 1986, Journal of neurophysiology.

[6]  Paul J. Abbas,et al.  An Improved Method of Reducing Stimulus Artifact in the Electrically Evoked Whole‐Nerve Potential , 2000, Ear and hearing.

[7]  J K Shallop,et al.  Summary of results using the nucleus CI24M implant to record the electrically evoked compound action potential. , 1999, Ear and hearing.

[8]  Robert K Shepherd,et al.  Long‐term sensorineural hearing loss induces functional changes in the rat auditory nerve , 2004, The European journal of neuroscience.

[9]  G S Donaldson,et al.  Psychometric functions and temporal integration in electric hearing. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[10]  Peter Heil,et al.  A unifying basis of auditory thresholds based on temporal summation , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[11]  Nace L. Golding,et al.  Recordings from slices indicate that octopus cells of the cochlear nucleus detect coincident firing of auditory nerve fibers with temporal precision , 1995, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[12]  N. Viemeister,et al.  Temporal integration and multiple looks. , 1991, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[13]  A E Vandali,et al.  Emphasis of short-duration acoustic speech cues for cochlear implant users. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  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.

[15]  Robert K Shepherd,et al.  Deafness alters auditory nerve fibre responses to cochlear implant stimulation , 2007, The European journal of neuroscience.

[16]  Norbert Dillier,et al.  A Simple Two-Component Model of the Electrically Evoked Compound Action Potential in the Human Cochlea , 2000, Audiology and Neurotology.

[17]  Lawrence T. Cohen,et al.  Practical model description of peripheral neural excitation in cochlear implant recipients: 4. Model development at low pulse rates: General model and application to individuals , 2009, Hearing Research.

[18]  Lawrence T. Cohen,et al.  Practical model description of peripheral neural excitation in cochlear implant recipients: 1. Growth of loudness and ECAP amplitude with current , 2009, Hearing Research.

[19]  B. Moore,et al.  A Model of Loudness Applicable to Time-Varying Sounds , 2002 .

[20]  P J Abbas,et al.  Electrically evoked whole-nerve action potentials: data from human cochlear implant users. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  D T Lawson,et al.  Temporal representations with cochlear implants. , 1997, The American journal of otology.

[22]  Lawrence T. Cohen Practical model description of peripheral neural excitation in cochlear implant recipients: 5. Refractory recovery and facilitation , 2009, Hearing Research.

[23]  Elaine Saunders,et al.  Spatial spread of neural excitation: comparison of compound action potential and forward-masking data in cochlear implant recipients , 2004, International journal of audiology.

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

[25]  Paul J. Abbas,et al.  Response Properties of the Refractory Auditory Nerve Fiber , 2001, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.