Cargando…

Cochlear implantation impairs intracochlear microcirculation and counteracts iNOS induction in guinea pigs

INTRODUCTION: Preservation of residual hearing remains a great challenge during cochlear implantation. Cochlear implant (CI) electrode array insertion induces changes in the microvasculature as well as nitric oxide (NO)-dependent vessel dysfunction which have been identified as possible mediators of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ernst, Benjamin Philipp, Heinrich, Ulf-Rüdiger, Fries, Mathias, Meuser, Regina, Rader, Tobias, Eckrich, Jonas, Stauber, Roland H., Strieth, Sebastian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10336219/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37448696
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fncel.2023.1189980
_version_ 1785071161727516672
author Ernst, Benjamin Philipp
Heinrich, Ulf-Rüdiger
Fries, Mathias
Meuser, Regina
Rader, Tobias
Eckrich, Jonas
Stauber, Roland H.
Strieth, Sebastian
author_facet Ernst, Benjamin Philipp
Heinrich, Ulf-Rüdiger
Fries, Mathias
Meuser, Regina
Rader, Tobias
Eckrich, Jonas
Stauber, Roland H.
Strieth, Sebastian
author_sort Ernst, Benjamin Philipp
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Preservation of residual hearing remains a great challenge during cochlear implantation. Cochlear implant (CI) electrode array insertion induces changes in the microvasculature as well as nitric oxide (NO)-dependent vessel dysfunction which have been identified as possible mediators of residual hearing loss after cochlear implantation. METHODS: A total of 24 guinea pigs were randomized to receive either a CI (n = 12) or a sham procedure (sham) by performing a cochleostomy without electrode array insertion (n = 12). The hearing threshold was determined using frequency-specific compound action potentials. To gain visual access to the stria vascularis, a microscopic window was created in the osseous cochlear lateral wall. Cochlear blood flow (CBF) and cochlear microvascular permeability (CMP) were evaluated immediately after treatment, as well as after 1 and 2 h, respectively. Finally, cochleae were resected for subsequent immunohistochemical analysis of the iNOS expression. RESULTS: The sham control group showed no change in mean CBF after 1 h (104.2 ± 0.7%) and 2 h (100.8 ± 3.6%) compared to baseline. In contrast, cochlear implantation resulted in a significant continuous decrease in CBF after 1 h (78.8 ± 8.1%, p < 0.001) and 2 h (60.6 ± 11.3%, p < 0.001). Additionally, the CI group exhibited a significantly increased CMP (+44.9% compared to baseline, p < 0.0001) and a significant increase in median hearing threshold (20.4 vs. 2.5 dB SPL, p = 0.0009) compared to sham after 2 h. Intriguingly, the CI group showed significantly lower iNOS-expression levels in the organ of Corti (329.5 vs. 54.33 AU, p = 0.0003), stria vascularis (596.7 vs. 48.51 AU, p < 0.0001), interdental cells (564.0 vs. 109.1 AU, p = 0.0003) and limbus fibrocytes (119.4 vs. 18.69 AU, p = 0.0286). CONCLUSION: Mechanical and NO-dependent microvascular dysfunction seem to play a pivotal role in residual hearing loss after CI electrode array insertion. This may be facilitated by the implantation associated decrease in iNOS expression. Therefore, stabilization of cochlear microcirculation could be a therapeutic strategy to preserve residual hearing.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10336219
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103362192023-07-13 Cochlear implantation impairs intracochlear microcirculation and counteracts iNOS induction in guinea pigs Ernst, Benjamin Philipp Heinrich, Ulf-Rüdiger Fries, Mathias Meuser, Regina Rader, Tobias Eckrich, Jonas Stauber, Roland H. Strieth, Sebastian Front Cell Neurosci Neuroscience INTRODUCTION: Preservation of residual hearing remains a great challenge during cochlear implantation. Cochlear implant (CI) electrode array insertion induces changes in the microvasculature as well as nitric oxide (NO)-dependent vessel dysfunction which have been identified as possible mediators of residual hearing loss after cochlear implantation. METHODS: A total of 24 guinea pigs were randomized to receive either a CI (n = 12) or a sham procedure (sham) by performing a cochleostomy without electrode array insertion (n = 12). The hearing threshold was determined using frequency-specific compound action potentials. To gain visual access to the stria vascularis, a microscopic window was created in the osseous cochlear lateral wall. Cochlear blood flow (CBF) and cochlear microvascular permeability (CMP) were evaluated immediately after treatment, as well as after 1 and 2 h, respectively. Finally, cochleae were resected for subsequent immunohistochemical analysis of the iNOS expression. RESULTS: The sham control group showed no change in mean CBF after 1 h (104.2 ± 0.7%) and 2 h (100.8 ± 3.6%) compared to baseline. In contrast, cochlear implantation resulted in a significant continuous decrease in CBF after 1 h (78.8 ± 8.1%, p < 0.001) and 2 h (60.6 ± 11.3%, p < 0.001). Additionally, the CI group exhibited a significantly increased CMP (+44.9% compared to baseline, p < 0.0001) and a significant increase in median hearing threshold (20.4 vs. 2.5 dB SPL, p = 0.0009) compared to sham after 2 h. Intriguingly, the CI group showed significantly lower iNOS-expression levels in the organ of Corti (329.5 vs. 54.33 AU, p = 0.0003), stria vascularis (596.7 vs. 48.51 AU, p < 0.0001), interdental cells (564.0 vs. 109.1 AU, p = 0.0003) and limbus fibrocytes (119.4 vs. 18.69 AU, p = 0.0286). CONCLUSION: Mechanical and NO-dependent microvascular dysfunction seem to play a pivotal role in residual hearing loss after CI electrode array insertion. This may be facilitated by the implantation associated decrease in iNOS expression. Therefore, stabilization of cochlear microcirculation could be a therapeutic strategy to preserve residual hearing. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-06-28 /pmc/articles/PMC10336219/ /pubmed/37448696 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fncel.2023.1189980 Text en Copyright © 2023 Ernst, Heinrich, Fries, Meuser, Rader, Eckrich, Stauber and Strieth. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Neuroscience
Ernst, Benjamin Philipp
Heinrich, Ulf-Rüdiger
Fries, Mathias
Meuser, Regina
Rader, Tobias
Eckrich, Jonas
Stauber, Roland H.
Strieth, Sebastian
Cochlear implantation impairs intracochlear microcirculation and counteracts iNOS induction in guinea pigs
title Cochlear implantation impairs intracochlear microcirculation and counteracts iNOS induction in guinea pigs
title_full Cochlear implantation impairs intracochlear microcirculation and counteracts iNOS induction in guinea pigs
title_fullStr Cochlear implantation impairs intracochlear microcirculation and counteracts iNOS induction in guinea pigs
title_full_unstemmed Cochlear implantation impairs intracochlear microcirculation and counteracts iNOS induction in guinea pigs
title_short Cochlear implantation impairs intracochlear microcirculation and counteracts iNOS induction in guinea pigs
title_sort cochlear implantation impairs intracochlear microcirculation and counteracts inos induction in guinea pigs
topic Neuroscience
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10336219/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37448696
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fncel.2023.1189980
work_keys_str_mv AT ernstbenjaminphilipp cochlearimplantationimpairsintracochlearmicrocirculationandcounteractsinosinductioninguineapigs
AT heinrichulfrudiger cochlearimplantationimpairsintracochlearmicrocirculationandcounteractsinosinductioninguineapigs
AT friesmathias cochlearimplantationimpairsintracochlearmicrocirculationandcounteractsinosinductioninguineapigs
AT meuserregina cochlearimplantationimpairsintracochlearmicrocirculationandcounteractsinosinductioninguineapigs
AT radertobias cochlearimplantationimpairsintracochlearmicrocirculationandcounteractsinosinductioninguineapigs
AT eckrichjonas cochlearimplantationimpairsintracochlearmicrocirculationandcounteractsinosinductioninguineapigs
AT stauberrolandh cochlearimplantationimpairsintracochlearmicrocirculationandcounteractsinosinductioninguineapigs
AT striethsebastian cochlearimplantationimpairsintracochlearmicrocirculationandcounteractsinosinductioninguineapigs