1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Management of Severe Facial Nerve Cross Stimulation by Cochlear Implant Replacement to Change Pulse Shape and Grounding Configuration: A Case-series

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Objectives:

          To investigate the combined effect of changing pulse shape and grounding configuration to manage facial nerve stimulation (FNS) in cochlear implant (CI) recipients.

          Patients:

          Three adult CI recipients with severe FNS were offered a replacement implant when standard stimulation strategies and programming adjustments did not resolve symptoms. Our hypothesis was that the facial nerve was less likely to be activated when using anodic pulses with “ mixed-mode” intra-cochlear and extra-cochlear current return.

          Intervention:

          All patients were reimplanted with an implant that uses a pseudo-monophasic anodic pulse shape, with mixed-mode grounding (stimulus mixed-mode anodic)—the Neuro Zti CI (Oticon Medical). This device also allows measurements of neural function and loudness with monopolar, symmetric biphasic pulses (stimulus MB), the clinical standard used by most CIs as a comparison.

          Main Outcome Measures:

          The combined effect of pulse shape and grounding configuration on FNS was monitored during surgery. Following CI activation, FNS symptoms and performance with the Neuro Zti implant were compared with outcomes before reimplantation.

          Results:

          FNS could only be recorded using stimulus MB for all patients. In clinical use, all patients reported reduced FNS and showed an improvement in Bamford-Kowal-Bench sentences recognition compared with immediately before reimplantation. Bamford-Kowal-Bench scores with a male speaker were lower compared with measurements taken before the onset of severe FNS for patients 1 and 2.

          Conclusions:

          In patients where CI auditory performance was severely limited by FNS, charge-balanced pseudo-monophasic stimulation mode with a mixed-mode grounding configuration limited FNS and improved loudness percept compared with standard biphasic stimulation with monopolar grounding.

          Related collections

          Most cited references31

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Neural stimulation and recording electrodes.

          Electrical stimulation of nerve tissue and recording of neural electrical activity are the basis of emerging prostheses and treatments for spinal cord injury, stroke, sensory deficits, and neurological disorders. An understanding of the electrochemical mechanisms underlying the behavior of neural stimulation and recording electrodes is important for the development of chronically implanted devices, particularly those employing large numbers of microelectrodes. For stimulation, materials that support charge injection by capacitive and faradaic mechanisms are available. These include titanium nitride, platinum, and iridium oxide, each with certain advantages and limitations. The use of charge-balanced waveforms and maximum electrochemical potential excursions as criteria for reversible charge injection with these electrode materials are described and critiqued. Techniques for characterizing electrochemical properties relevant to stimulation and recording are described with examples of differences in the in vitro and in vivo response of electrodes.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Higher Sensitivity of Human Auditory Nerve Fibers to Positive Electrical Currents

            Most contemporary cochlear implants (CIs) stimulate the auditory nerve with trains of amplitude-modulated, symmetric biphasic pulses. Although both polarities of a pulse can depolarize the nerve fibers and generate action potentials, it remains unknown which of the two (positive or negative) phases has the stronger effect. Understanding the effects of pulse polarity will help to optimize the stimulation protocols and to deliver the most relevant information to the implant listeners. Animal experiments have shown that cathodic (negative) current flows are more effective than anodic (positive) ones in eliciting neural responses, and this finding has motivated the development of novel speech-processing algorithms. In this study, we show electrophysiologically and psychophysically that the human auditory system exhibits the opposite pattern, being more sensitive to anodic stimulation. We measured electrically evoked compound action potentials in CI listeners for phase-separated pulses, allowing us to tease out the responses to each of the two opposite-polarity phases. At an equal stimulus level, the anodic phase yielded the larger response. Furthermore, a measure of psychophysical masking patterns revealed that this polarity difference was still present at higher levels of the auditory system and was therefore not solely due to antidromic propagation of the neural response. This finding may relate to a particular orientation of the nerve fibers relative to the electrode or to a substantial degeneration and demyelination of the peripheral processes. Potential applications to improve CI speech-processing strategies are discussed.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Asymmetric pulses in cochlear implants: effects of pulse shape, polarity, and rate.

              Existing cochlear implants stimulate the auditory nerve with trains of symmetric biphasic (BP) pulses. Recent data have shown that modifying the pulse shape, while maintaining charge balance, may be beneficial in terms of reducing power consumption, increasing dynamic range, and limiting channel interactions. We measured thresholds and most comfortable levels (MCLs) for various 99-pulses-per-second (pps) stimuli. "Pseudomonophasic (PS)" pulses consist of a brief phase of one polarity followed immediately by a longer and lower-amplitude phase of the opposite polarity. We focused on a novel variant of PS pulses, termed the "delayed pseudomonophasic (DPS)" stimulus, in which the longer phase is presented midway between the short phases of two consecutive pulses. DPS pulse trains produced thresholds that were more than 10 dB lower than those obtained with BP pulses. This reduction was much greater than the 0- to 3-dB drop obtained with PS pulses and was still more than 6 dB when a pulse rate of 892 pps was used. A study of the relative contributions of the two phases of DPS suggested that the short, high-amplitude phase dominated the perceived loudness. This study showed major threshold and MCL reductions using a DPS stimulus compared to the widely used BP stimulus. These reductions, which were predicted by a simple linear filter model, might lead to considerable power savings if implemented in a cochlear implant speech processor.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Otol Neurotol
                Otol Neurotol
                MAO
                Otology & Neurotology
                Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (Hagerstown, MD )
                1531-7129
                1537-4505
                April 2022
                27 January 2022
                : 43
                : 4
                : 452-459
                Affiliations
                []Emmeline Centre, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
                []Cambridge Hearing Group, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, University of Cambridge
                []Cambridge Hearing Group, MRC Cognition & Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge
                [§ ]Guy's and St. Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, London
                [|| ]Oticon Medical, UK
                Author notes
                Address correspondence and reprint requests to Manohar L. Bance, M.D., Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, UK; E-mail: mlb59@ 123456cam.ac.uk
                Article
                ON-21-489 00006
                10.1097/MAO.0000000000003493
                8915992
                35085112
                e7fafeae-cd20-431f-8a93-266f3b2c5fa1
                Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of Otology & Neurotology, Inc.

                This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CCBY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0

                History
                Categories
                Cochlear Implants
                Custom metadata
                TRUE

                biphasic anodic stimulation,cochlear implant,distributed all polar grounding,facial nerve stimulation,programming,pseudo-monophasic,reimplantation

                Comments

                Comment on this article