Reducing Current Spread Using Current Focusing in Cochlear Implant Users

Overview

Journal Hear Res

Specialty Otorhinolaryngology

Date 2012 Jan 11

PMID 22230370

Citations 58

Authors

David M Landsberger

Monica Padilla

Arthi G Srinivasan

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Cochlear implant performance in difficult listening situations is limited by channel interactions. It is known that partial tripolar (PTP) stimulation reduces the spread of excitation (SOE). However, the greater the degree of current focusing, the greater the absolute current required to maintain a fixed loudness. As current increases, so does SOE. In experiment 1, the SOE for equally loud stimuli with different degrees of current focusing is measured via a forward-masking procedure. Results suggest that at a fixed loudness, some but not all patients have a reduced SOE with PTP stimulation. Therefore, it seems likely that a PTP speech processing strategy could improve spectral resolution for only those patients with a reduced SOE. In experiment 2, the ability to discriminate different levels of current focusing was measured. In experiment 3, patients subjectively scaled verbal descriptors of stimuli of various levels of current focusing. Both discrimination and scaling of verbal descriptors correlated well with SOE reduction, suggesting that either technique have the potential to be used clinically to quickly predict which patients would receive benefit from a current focusing strategy.

Citing Articles

Visual Reliance in Severe Hearing Loss: Visual Evoked Potentials (VEPs) Study.

Gabr T, Hashem A, Ahmed S, Zeinhom M Audiol Res. 2025; 15(1.

PMID: 39846556 PMC: 11755637. DOI: 10.3390/audiolres15010003.

Electro-vibrational stimulation results in improved speech perception in noise for cochlear implant users with bilateral residual hearing.

Geerardyn A, De Voecht K, Wouters J, Verhaert N Sci Rep. 2023; 13(1):11251.

PMID: 37438474 PMC: 10338449. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-38468-0.

Comparing Fixed and Individualized Channel Interaction Coefficients for Speech Perception With Dynamic Focusing Cochlear Implant Strategies.

Caswell-Midwinter B, Arenberg J Trends Hear. 2023; 27:23312165231176157.

PMID: 37226501 PMC: 10226176. DOI: 10.1177/23312165231176157.

Electrical Field Interactions during Adjacent Electrode Stimulations: eABR Evaluation in Cochlear Implant Users.

Guevara N, Truy E, Hoen M, Hermann R, Vandersteen C, Gallego S J Clin Med. 2023; 12(2).

PMID: 36675534 PMC: 9865217. DOI: 10.3390/jcm12020605.

The intraoperative relationship between intracochlear electrical field and excitability of the auditory nerve.

Soderqvist S, Sinkkonen S, Sivonen V Heliyon. 2022; 8(12):e11970.

PMID: 36478811 PMC: 9720605. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11970.

References

H M Mens L, Berenstein C . Speech perception with mono- and quadrupolar electrode configurations: a crossover study. Otol Neurotol. 2005; 26(5):957-64. DOI: 10.1097/01.mao.0000185060.74339.9d. View

Koch D, Downing M, Osberger M, Litvak L . Using current steering to increase spectral resolution in CII and HiRes 90K users. Ear Hear. 2007; 28(2 Suppl):38S-41S. DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31803150de. View

McDermott H, McKay C . Pitch ranking with nonsimultaneous dual-electrode electrical stimulation of the cochlea. J Acoust Soc Am. 1994; 96(1):155-62. DOI: 10.1121/1.410475. View

Srinivasan A, Landsberger D, Shannon R . Current focusing sharpens local peaks of excitation in cochlear implant stimulation. Hear Res. 2010; 270(1-2):89-100. PMC: 2997903. DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2010.09.004. View

Filipo R, Mancini P, Ballantyne D, Bosco E, DElia C . Short-term study of the effect of speech coding strategy on the auditory performance of pre- and post-lingually deafened adults implanted with the Clarion CII. Acta Otolaryngol. 2004; 124(4):368-70. DOI: 10.1080/00016480410016324. View

Berenstein C, H M Mens L, Mulder J, Vanpoucke F . Current steering and current focusing in cochlear implants: comparison of monopolar, tripolar, and virtual channel electrode configurations. Ear Hear. 2008; 29(2):250-60. DOI: 10.1097/aud.0b013e3181645336. View

Fu Q, Shannon R, Wang X . Effects of noise and spectral resolution on vowel and consonant recognition: acoustic and electric hearing. J Acoust Soc Am. 1998; 104(6):3586-96. DOI: 10.1121/1.423941. View

Vandali A, Whitford L, Plant K, Clark G . Speech perception as a function of electrical stimulation rate: using the Nucleus 24 cochlear implant system. Ear Hear. 2001; 21(6):608-24. DOI: 10.1097/00003446-200012000-00008. View

Kral A, Hartmann R, Mortazavi D, Klinke R . Spatial resolution of cochlear implants: the electrical field and excitation of auditory afferents. Hear Res. 1998; 121(1-2):11-28. DOI: 10.1016/s0378-5955(98)00061-6. View

10.

Landsberger D, Srinivasan A . Virtual channel discrimination is improved by current focusing in cochlear implant recipients. Hear Res. 2009; 254(1-2):34-41. PMC: 2760742. DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2009.04.007. View

11.

Pfingst B, Franck K, Xu L, Bauer E, Zwolan T . Effects of electrode configuration and place of stimulation on speech perception with cochlear prostheses. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2001; 2(2):87-103. PMC: 3201186. DOI: 10.1007/s101620010065. View

12.

Bierer J, Bierer S, Middlebrooks J . Partial tripolar cochlear implant stimulation: Spread of excitation and forward masking in the inferior colliculus. Hear Res. 2010; 270(1-2):134-42. PMC: 2997905. DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2010.08.006. View

13.

Friesen L, Shannon R, Baskent D, Wang X . Speech recognition in noise as a function of the number of spectral channels: comparison of acoustic hearing and cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am. 2001; 110(2):1150-63. DOI: 10.1121/1.1381538. View

14.

Jesteadt W . An adaptive procedure for subjective judgments. Percept Psychophys. 1980; 28(1):85-8. DOI: 10.3758/bf03204321. View

15.

Jolly C, Spelman F, Clopton B . Quadrupolar stimulation for Cochlear prostheses: modeling and experimental data. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1996; 43(8):857-65. DOI: 10.1109/10.508549. View

16.

LEVITT H . Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. J Acoust Soc Am. 1971; 49(2):Suppl 2:467+. View

17.

Bierer J . Threshold and channel interaction in cochlear implant users: evaluation of the tripolar electrode configuration. J Acoust Soc Am. 2007; 121(3):1642-53. DOI: 10.1121/1.2436712. View

18.

Smith Z, Delgutte B, Oxenham A . Chimaeric sounds reveal dichotomies in auditory perception. Nature. 2002; 416(6876):87-90. PMC: 2268248. DOI: 10.1038/416087a. View

19.

Spelman F, Pfingst B, Clopton B, Jolly C, Rodenhiser K . Effects of electrical current configuration on potential fields in the electrically stimulated cochlea: field models and measurements. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl. 1995; 166:131-6. View

20.

Bonham B, Litvak L . Current focusing and steering: modeling, physiology, and psychophysics. Hear Res. 2008; 242(1-2):141-53. PMC: 2562351. DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2008.03.006. View