Dataset Information

EABR THR Estimation Using High-Rate Multi-Pulse Stimulation in Cochlear Implant Users.

ABSTRACT: We estimated the electrically-evoked auditory brainstem response thresholds (eABR THRs) in response to multi-pulses with high burst rate of 10,000 pulses-per-second (pps). Growth functions of wave eV amplitudes, root mean square (RMS) values, peak of phase-locking value (PLV), and the lowest valid data point (LVDP) were calculated in 1-, 2-, 4-, 8-, and 16-pulses conditions. The growth functions were then fitted and extrapolated with linear and exponential functions to find eABR THRs. The estimated THRs were compared to psychophysical THRs determined for multi-pulse conditions as well as to the clinical THRs measured behaviorally at the rate of 1,000 pps. The growth functions of features showed shallower growth slopes when the number of pulses increased. eABR THRs estimated in 4-, 8-, and 16-pulses conditions were closer to the clinical THRs, when compared to 1- and 2-pulses conditions. However, the smallest difference between estimated eABR THRs and clinical THRs was not always achieved from the same number of pulses. The smallest absolute difference of 30.3 μA was found for the linear fittings on growth functions of eABR RMS values in 4-pulses condition. Pearson's correlation coefficients (PCCs) between eABR THRs and psychophysical THRs were significant and relatively large in all but 16-pulses conditions. The PCCs between eABR THRs and clinical THRs, however, were smaller and in less cases significant. Results of this study showed that eABRs to multi-pulse stimulation could, to some extent, represent clinical stimulation paradigms, and thus in comparison to single pulses, could estimate clinical THRs with smaller errors.

SUBMITTER: Saeedi A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8358126 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Electrical interaural time delay (ITD) discrimination was measured using 300-ms bursts applied to binaural pitch matched electrodes at basal, mid, and apical locations in each ear. Six bilateral implant users, who had previously shown good ITD sensitivity at a pulse rate of 100 pulses per second (pps), were assessed. Thresholds were measured as a function of pulse rate between 100 and 1,000 Hz, as well as modulation rate over that same range for high-rate pulse trains at 6,000 pps. Results were similar for all three places of stimulation and showed decreasing ITD sensitivity as either pulse rate or modulation rate increased, although the extent of that effect varied across subjects. The results support a model comprising a common ITD mechanism for high- and low-frequency places of stimulation, which, for electrical stimulation, is rate-limited in the same way across electrodes because peripheral temporal responses are largely place invariant. Overall, ITD sensitivity was somewhat better with unmodulated pulse trains than with high-rate pulse trains modulated at matched rates, although comparisons at individual rates showed that difference to be significant only at 300 Hz. Electrodes presenting with the lowest thresholds at 600 Hz were further assessed using bursts with a ramped onset of 10 ms. The slower rise time resulted in decreased performance in four of the listeners, but not in the two best performers, indicating that those two could use ongoing cues at 600 Hz. Performance at each place was also measured using single-pulse stimuli. Comparison of those data with the unmodulated 300-ms burst thresholds showed that on average, the addition of ongoing cues beyond the onset enhanced overall ITD sensitivity at 100 and 300 Hz, but not at 600 Hz. At 1,000 Hz, the added ongoing cues actually decreased performance. That result is attributed to the introduction of ambiguous cues within the physiologically relevant range and increased dichotic firing.

Project description:RationalePrevious cochlear implant (CI) studies have shown that single-channel amplitude modulation frequency discrimination (AMFD) can be improved when coherent modulation is delivered to additional channels. It is unclear whether the multi-channel advantage is due to increased loudness, multiple envelope representations, or to component channels with better temporal processing. Measuring envelope interference may shed light on how modulated channels can be combined.MethodsIn this study, multi-channel AMFD was measured in CI subjects using a 3-alternative forced-choice, non-adaptive procedure ("which interval is different?"). For the reference stimulus, the reference AM (100 Hz) was delivered to all 3 channels. For the probe stimulus, the target AM (101, 102, 104, 108, 116, 132, 164, 228, or 256 Hz) was delivered to 1 of 3 channels, and the reference AM (100 Hz) delivered to the other 2 channels. The spacing between electrodes was varied to be wide or narrow to test different degrees of channel interaction.ResultsResults showed that CI subjects were highly sensitive to interactions between the reference and target envelopes. However, performance was non-monotonic as a function of target AM frequency. For the wide spacing, there was significantly less envelope interaction when the target AM was delivered to the basal channel. For the narrow spacing, there was no effect of target AM channel. The present data were also compared to a related previous study in which the target AM was delivered to a single channel or to all 3 channels. AMFD was much better with multiple than with single channels whether the target AM was delivered to 1 of 3 or to all 3 channels. For very small differences between the reference and target AM frequencies (2-4 Hz), there was often greater sensitivity when the target AM was delivered to 1 of 3 channels versus all 3 channels, especially for narrowly spaced electrodes.ConclusionsBesides the increased loudness, the present results also suggest that multiple envelope representations may contribute to the multi-channel advantage observed in previous AMFD studies. The different patterns of results for the wide and narrow spacing suggest a peripheral contribution to multi-channel temporal processing. Because the effect of target AM frequency was non-monotonic in this study, adaptive procedures may not be suitable to measure AMFD thresholds with interfering envelopes. Envelope interactions among multiple channels may be quite complex, depending on the envelope information presented to each channel and the relative independence of the stimulated channels.

Dataset Information

EABR THR Estimation Using High-Rate Multi-Pulse Stimulation in Cochlear Implant Users.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets