Dataset Information

Establishing Reproducibility and Correlation of Cochlear Microphonic Amplitude to Implant Electrode Position Using Intraoperative Electrocochleography and Postoperative Cone Beam Computed Tomography.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

The primary objective of this study was to establish the reproducibility of cochlear microphonic (CM) recordings obtained from a cochlear implant (CI) electrode contact during and immediately after insertion. This was achieved by evaluating the insertion angle and calculating the position of the apical electrode contact during insertion, using postoperative cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). The secondary objective was to create individualized patient maps of electrode contacts located within acoustically sensitive regions by correlating the CM amplitude to the electrode position determined using CBCT.

Methods

CMs were recorded from a CI electrode contact during and immediately after insertion in 12 patients (n = 14 ears). Intraoperative recordings were made for a 0.5 kHz tone burst stimulus and were recorded from the apical electrode contact. Postinsertion recordings were made from the odd-numbered electrode contacts (1-15) along the array, using a range of stimulus frequencies (from 0.125 to 2 kHz). The time point at which each electrode contact passed through the round window was noted throughout the insertion, and the CM amplitude at this point was correlated to postoperative CBCT. This correlation was then used to estimate the CM amplitude at particular points within the cochlea, which was in turn compared with the amplitudes recorded from each electrode postoperatively to assess the reproducibility of the recordings.

Results

Significant correlation was shown between intraoperative insertion and postinsertion angles at two amplitude events (maximum amplitude: 29° mean absolute error, r = 0.77, p = 0.006; 10% of maximum amplitude: 52° mean absolute error, r = 0.85, p = 0.002).

Conclusion

We have developed a novel method to demonstrate the reproducibility of the CM responses recorded from a CI electrode during insertion. By correlating the CM amplitude with the postoperative CBCT, we have also been able to create individualized maps of CM responses, categorizing the cochlea into acoustically responsive and unresponsive regions. If the electrode contacts within the acoustically sensitive regions are shown to be associated with improved loudness discrimination, it could have implications for optimal electrode mapping and placement.

SUBMITTER: Soulby A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8378545 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Access to low-frequency acoustic information in cochlear implant patients leads to better speech understanding in noise. Electrocochleography (ECochG) can provide real-time feedback about the health of the cochlea during the insertion process with the potential to reduce insertion trauma. We describe our experiences of using this technique. Data from 47 adult subjects with measurable residual hearing and an Advanced Bionics (Valencia, CA) SlimJ (46) or MidScala (1) electrode array were analyzed. ECochGs were recorded intraoperatively via the implant. The surgeon adjusted the course of the electrode insertion based on drops in the ECochG. The final array position was assessed using postoperative imaging and pure tone thresholds were measured before and after surgery. Three different patterns of ECochG response amplitude were observed: Growth, Fluctuating and Total Loss. Subjects in the growth group showed the smallest postoperative hearing loss. However, the group with fluctuating amplitudes showed no meaningful correlation between the ECochG responses and the postoperative hearing loss, indicating that amplitude alone is insufficient for detecting damage. Considering the phase of the signal additionally to the amplitude and reclassifying the data by both the phase and amplitude of the response into three groups Type I-Type III produced statistically significant correlations between postoperative hearing loss and the grouping based on amplitude and phase respectively. We showed significantly better hearing preservation for Type I (no drop in amplitude) and Type II (drop with a concurrent phase shift), while Type III (drop without concurrent phase shift) had more surgery induced hearing loss. ECochG potentials measured through the implant could provide valuable feedback during the electrode insertion. Both the amplitude and phase of the ECochG response are important to consider. More data needs to be evaluated to better understand the impact of the different signal components to design an automated system to alert the surgeon ahead of damaging the cochlea.

Project description:Multielectrode cochlear implants rely on differential stimulation of the cochlear nerve for presenting the brain with the spectral and timing information required to understand speech. In implant patients, the degree of overlap among cochlear nerve fibers stimulated by the different electrodes constitutes the electrode interaction. Electrode interaction degrades the spectral resolution of the implant's stimulus. We sought to define electrode interaction in a cohort of pediatric cochlear implant subjects as a function of both stimulus intensity and electrode location along the array. The 27 pediatric subjects that completed the study were implanted with either the Clarion Hi-Focus array with or without positioner, the Nucleus 24 Contour array, or the Nucleus 24 Straight array. All but two of the patients had congenital hearing loss, and none of the patients had meningitis prior to the onset of deafness. The cochlear nerve response was measured with the electrically evoked compound action potential (ECAP). A forward masking protocol was used such that a probe stimulus electrode remained fixed while a preceding masker was moved across the array. Electrode interaction was estimated by measuring the unmasked probe response minus the masked probe response. Three probe locations and three probe intensities were examined for each subject. At all probe locations, electrode interaction increased as probe intensity increased (p < 0.05). Interaction at the basal probe was less than that at either the middle or apical probe locations (p < 0.05), and significant correlation found between probe distance from the basal end of the array and electrode interaction (p < 0.001). These results demonstrate that in this cohort of pediatric subjects, electrode interaction depended on both stimulus intensity and probe location. Implications of these findings on future implant array design and current implant fitting strategies are discussed. The impact of electrode interaction on implant performance is yet to be elucidated.