Cargando…
The Effect of Phantom Stimulation and Pseudomonophasic Pulse Shapes on Pitch Perception by Cochlear Implant Listeners
It has been suggested that a specialized high-temporal-acuity brainstem pathway can be activated by stimulating more apically in the cochlea than is achieved by cochlear implants (CIs) when programmed with contemporary clinical settings. We performed multiple experiments to test the effect on pitch...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer US
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7644600/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32804337 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10162-020-00768-x |
_version_ | 1783606489682804736 |
---|---|
author | Lamping, Wiebke Deeks, John M. Marozeau, Jeremy Carlyon, Robert P. |
author_facet | Lamping, Wiebke Deeks, John M. Marozeau, Jeremy Carlyon, Robert P. |
author_sort | Lamping, Wiebke |
collection | PubMed |
description | It has been suggested that a specialized high-temporal-acuity brainstem pathway can be activated by stimulating more apically in the cochlea than is achieved by cochlear implants (CIs) when programmed with contemporary clinical settings. We performed multiple experiments to test the effect on pitch perception of phantom stimulation and asymmetric current pulses, both supposedly stimulating beyond the most apical electrode of a CI. The two stimulus types were generated using a bipolar electrode pair, composed of the most apical electrode of the array and a neighboring, more basal electrode. Experiment 1 used a pitch-ranking procedure where neural excitation was shifted apically or basally using so-called phantom stimulation. No benefit of apical phantom stimulation was found on the highest rate up to which pitch ranks increased (upper limit), nor on the slopes of the pitch-ranking function above 300 pulses per second (pps). Experiment 2 used the same procedure to study the effects of apical pseudomonophasic pulses, where the locus of excitation was manipulated by changing stimulus polarity. A benefit of apical stimulation was obtained for the slopes above 300 pps. Experiment 3 used an adaptive rate discrimination procedure and found a small but significant benefit of both types of apical stimulation. Overall, the results show some benefit for apical stimulation on temporal pitch processing at high pulse rates but reveal that the effect is smaller and more variable across listeners than suggested by previous research. The results also provide some indication that the benefit of apical stimulation may decline over time since implantation. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7644600 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Springer US |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-76446002020-11-10 The Effect of Phantom Stimulation and Pseudomonophasic Pulse Shapes on Pitch Perception by Cochlear Implant Listeners Lamping, Wiebke Deeks, John M. Marozeau, Jeremy Carlyon, Robert P. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol Research Article It has been suggested that a specialized high-temporal-acuity brainstem pathway can be activated by stimulating more apically in the cochlea than is achieved by cochlear implants (CIs) when programmed with contemporary clinical settings. We performed multiple experiments to test the effect on pitch perception of phantom stimulation and asymmetric current pulses, both supposedly stimulating beyond the most apical electrode of a CI. The two stimulus types were generated using a bipolar electrode pair, composed of the most apical electrode of the array and a neighboring, more basal electrode. Experiment 1 used a pitch-ranking procedure where neural excitation was shifted apically or basally using so-called phantom stimulation. No benefit of apical phantom stimulation was found on the highest rate up to which pitch ranks increased (upper limit), nor on the slopes of the pitch-ranking function above 300 pulses per second (pps). Experiment 2 used the same procedure to study the effects of apical pseudomonophasic pulses, where the locus of excitation was manipulated by changing stimulus polarity. A benefit of apical stimulation was obtained for the slopes above 300 pps. Experiment 3 used an adaptive rate discrimination procedure and found a small but significant benefit of both types of apical stimulation. Overall, the results show some benefit for apical stimulation on temporal pitch processing at high pulse rates but reveal that the effect is smaller and more variable across listeners than suggested by previous research. The results also provide some indication that the benefit of apical stimulation may decline over time since implantation. Springer US 2020-08-17 2020-12 /pmc/articles/PMC7644600/ /pubmed/32804337 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10162-020-00768-x Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Lamping, Wiebke Deeks, John M. Marozeau, Jeremy Carlyon, Robert P. The Effect of Phantom Stimulation and Pseudomonophasic Pulse Shapes on Pitch Perception by Cochlear Implant Listeners |
title | The Effect of Phantom Stimulation and Pseudomonophasic Pulse Shapes on Pitch Perception by Cochlear Implant Listeners |
title_full | The Effect of Phantom Stimulation and Pseudomonophasic Pulse Shapes on Pitch Perception by Cochlear Implant Listeners |
title_fullStr | The Effect of Phantom Stimulation and Pseudomonophasic Pulse Shapes on Pitch Perception by Cochlear Implant Listeners |
title_full_unstemmed | The Effect of Phantom Stimulation and Pseudomonophasic Pulse Shapes on Pitch Perception by Cochlear Implant Listeners |
title_short | The Effect of Phantom Stimulation and Pseudomonophasic Pulse Shapes on Pitch Perception by Cochlear Implant Listeners |
title_sort | effect of phantom stimulation and pseudomonophasic pulse shapes on pitch perception by cochlear implant listeners |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7644600/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32804337 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10162-020-00768-x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT lampingwiebke theeffectofphantomstimulationandpseudomonophasicpulseshapesonpitchperceptionbycochlearimplantlisteners AT deeksjohnm theeffectofphantomstimulationandpseudomonophasicpulseshapesonpitchperceptionbycochlearimplantlisteners AT marozeaujeremy theeffectofphantomstimulationandpseudomonophasicpulseshapesonpitchperceptionbycochlearimplantlisteners AT carlyonrobertp theeffectofphantomstimulationandpseudomonophasicpulseshapesonpitchperceptionbycochlearimplantlisteners AT lampingwiebke effectofphantomstimulationandpseudomonophasicpulseshapesonpitchperceptionbycochlearimplantlisteners AT deeksjohnm effectofphantomstimulationandpseudomonophasicpulseshapesonpitchperceptionbycochlearimplantlisteners AT marozeaujeremy effectofphantomstimulationandpseudomonophasicpulseshapesonpitchperceptionbycochlearimplantlisteners AT carlyonrobertp effectofphantomstimulationandpseudomonophasicpulseshapesonpitchperceptionbycochlearimplantlisteners |