J Audiol Otol.  2019 Jul;23(3):145-152. 10.7874/jao.2019.00164.

Effect of Cochlear Implant Electrode Array Design on Electrophysiological and Psychophysical Measures: Lateral Wall versus Perimodiolar Types

Affiliations
  • 1Department of Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology, Daegu Catholic University, Gyeongsan, Korea. jyslwm@gmail.com
  • 2Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck-Surgery, Samsung Changwon Hospital, School of Medicine, Sungkyunkwan University, Changwon, Korea.
  • 3Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck-Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, School of Medicine, Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul, Korea.
  • 4Hearing Research Laboratory of Samsung Medical Center-Samsung Electronics Co., Seoul, Korea.
  • 5Department of Speech-Language Pathology, Graduate School of Social Education, Myongji University, Seoul, Korea.
  • 6Sungkyunkwan University Samsung Advanced Institute for Health Sciences and Technology, Seoul, Korea.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
The present study aims to investigate whether the cochlear implant electrode array design affects the electrophysiological and psychophysical measures.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS
Eighty five ears were used as data in this retrospective study. They were divided into two groups by the electrode array design: lateral wall type (LW) and perimodiolar type (PM). The electrode site was divided into three regions (basal, medial, apical). The evoked compound action potential (ECAP) threshold, T level, C level, dynamic range (DR), and aided air conduction threshold were measured.
RESULTS
The ECAP threshold was lower for the PM than for the LW, and decreased as the electrode site was closer to the apical region. The T level was lower for the PM than for the LW, and was lower on the apical region than on the other regions. The C level on the basal region was lower for the PM than for the LW whereas the C level was lower on the apical region than on the other regions. The DRs on the apical region was greater for the PM than for the LW whereas the DR was narrower on the apical region than on the other regions. The aided air conduction threshold was not different for the electrode design and frequency.
CONCLUSIONS
The current study would support the advantages of the PM over the LW in that the PM had the lower current level and greater DR, which could result in more localized neural stimulation and reduced power consumption.

Keyword

Cochlear implant electrode arrays; Lateral wall; Perimodiolar; ECAP; Mapping

MeSH Terms

Action Potentials
Cochlear Implants*
Ear
Electrodes*
Retrospective Studies
Full Text Links
  • JAO
Actions
Cited
CITED
export Copy
Close
Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
Similar articles
    DB Error: unknown error