Effects of phase duration and pulse rate on loudness and pitch percepts in the first auditory midbrain implant patients: Comparison to cochlear implant and auditory brainstem implant results
- PMID: 18384971
- DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2008.02.041
Effects of phase duration and pulse rate on loudness and pitch percepts in the first auditory midbrain implant patients: Comparison to cochlear implant and auditory brainstem implant results
Abstract
The auditory midbrain implant (AMI), which is designed for stimulation of the inferior colliculus (IC), is now in clinical trials. The AMI consists of a single shank array (20 contacts) and uses a stimulation strategy originally designed for cochlear implants since it is already approved for human use and we do not yet know how to optimally activate the auditory midbrain. The goal of this study was to investigate the effects of different pulse rates and phase durations on loudness and pitch percepts because these parameters are required to implement the AMI stimulation strategy. Although each patient was implanted into a different region (i.e. lateral lemniscus, central nucleus of IC, dorsal cortex of IC), they generally exhibited similar threshold versus phase duration, threshold versus pulse rate, and pitch versus pulse rate curves. In particular, stimulation with 100 mus/phase, 250 pulse per second (pps) pulse trains achieved an optimal balance among safety, energy, and current threshold requirements while avoiding rate pitch effects. However, we observed large differences across patients in loudness adaptation to continuous pulse stimulation over long time scales. One patient (implanted in dorsal cortex of IC) even experienced complete loudness decay and elevation of thresholds with daily stimulation. Comparing these results with those of cochlear implant and auditory brainstem implant patients, it appears that stimulation of higher order neurons exhibits less and even no loudness summation for higher rate stimuli and greater current leakage for longer phase durations than that of cochlear neurons. The fact that all midbrain regions we stimulated, which includes three distinctly different nuclei, exhibited similar loudness summation effects (i.e. none for pulse rates above 250 pps) suggests a possible shift in some coding properties that is affected more by which stage along the auditory pathway rather than the types of neurons are being stimulated. However, loudness adaptation occurs at multiple stages from the cochlea up to the midbrain.
Similar articles
-
Effects of pulse rate on thresholds and loudness of biphasic and alternating monophasic pulse trains in electrical hearing.Hear Res. 2006 Oct;220(1-2):49-60. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2006.06.015. Epub 2006 Aug 10. Hear Res. 2006. PMID: 16904278
-
Pitch and loudness matching of unmodulated and modulated stimuli in cochlear implantees.Hear Res. 2013 Aug;302:32-49. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2013.05.004. Epub 2013 May 16. Hear Res. 2013. PMID: 23685148
-
Relation between neural response telemetry thresholds, T- and C-levels, and loudness judgments in 12 adult nucleus 24 cochlear implant recipients.Ear Hear. 2007 Aug;28(4):495-511. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31806dc16e. Ear Hear. 2007. PMID: 17609612
-
The auditory midbrain implant: a new auditory prosthesis for neural deafness-concept and device description.Otol Neurotol. 2006 Sep;27(6):838-43. doi: 10.1097/01.mao.0000232010.01116.e9. Otol Neurotol. 2006. PMID: 16936570 Review.
-
Place-pitch and vowel-pitch comparisons in cochlear implant patients using the Melbourne-Nucleus cochlear implant.J Laryngol Otol Suppl. 1989;19:1-31. J Laryngol Otol Suppl. 1989. PMID: 2693565 Review.
Cited by
-
Effects of Electrical Stimulation in the Inferior Colliculus on Frequency Discrimination by Rhesus Monkeys and Implications for the Auditory Midbrain Implant.J Neurosci. 2016 May 4;36(18):5071-83. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3540-15.2016. J Neurosci. 2016. PMID: 27147659 Free PMC article.
-
Amplitude modulation reduces loudness adaptation to high-frequency tones.J Acoust Soc Am. 2015 Jul;138(1):279-83. doi: 10.1121/1.4922707. J Acoust Soc Am. 2015. PMID: 26233027 Free PMC article.
-
Auditory midbrain implant: a review.Trends Amplif. 2009 Sep;13(3):149-80. doi: 10.1177/1084713809348372. Trends Amplif. 2009. PMID: 19762428 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Auditory midbrain implant: research and development towards a second clinical trial.Hear Res. 2015 Apr;322:212-23. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2015.01.006. Epub 2015 Jan 20. Hear Res. 2015. PMID: 25613994 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Effect of Pulse Rate and Polarity on the Sensitivity of Auditory Brainstem and Cochlear Implant Users to Electrical Stimulation.J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2015 Oct;16(5):653-68. doi: 10.1007/s10162-015-0530-z. Epub 2015 Jul 3. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2015. PMID: 26138501 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources