Search

A series of experiments investigated potential changes in temporal processing during the months following activation of a cochlear implant (CI) and as a function of stimulus level. Experiment 1 tested patients on the day of implant activation and 2 and 6 months later. All stimuli were presented using direct stimulation of a single apical electrode. The dependent variables were rate discrimination ratios (RDRs) for pulse trains with rates centred on 120 pulses per second (pps), obtained using an adaptive procedure, and a measure of the upper limit of temporal pitch, obtained using a pitch-ranking procedure. All stimuli were presented at their most comfortable level (MCL). RDRs decreased from 1.23 to 1.16 and the upper limit increased from 357 to 485 pps from 0 to 2 months post-activation, with no overall change from 2 to 6 months. Because MCLs and hence the testing level increased across sessions, two further experiments investigated whether the performance changes observed across sessions could be due to level differences. Experiment 2 re-tested a subset of subjects at 9 months post-activation, using current levels similar to those used at 0 months. Although the stimuli sounded softer, some subjects showed lower RDRs and/or higher upper limits at this re-test. Experiment 3 measured RDRs and the upper limit for a separate group of subjects at levels equal to 60 %, 80 % and 100 % of the dynamic range. RDRs decreased with increasing level. The upper limit increased with increasing level for most subjects, with two notable exceptions. Implications of the results for temporal plasticity are discussed, along with possible influences of the effects of level and of across-session learning.

Temporal processing by cochlear implant listeners is degraded and is affected by auditory deprivation. The fast-acting Kv3.1 potassium channel is important for sustained temporally accurate firing and is also susceptible to deprivation, the effects of which can be partially restored in animals by the molecule AUT00063. We report the results of a randomised placebo-controlled double-blind study on psychophysical tests of the effects of AUT00063 on temporal processing by CI listeners. The study measured the upper limit of temporal pitch, gap detection, and discrimination of low rates (centred on 120 pps) for monopolar pulse trains presented to an apical electrode. The upper limit was measured using the optimally efficient midpoint comparison (MPC) pitch-ranking procedure; thresholds were obtained for the other two measures using an adaptive procedure. Twelve CI users (MedEl and Cochlear) were tested before and after two periods of AUT00063 or placebo in a within-subject crossover study. No significant differences occurred between post-drug and post-placebo conditions. This absence of effect occurred despite high test-retest reliability for all three measures, obtained by comparing performance on the two baseline visits, and despite the demonstrated sensitivity of the measures to modest changes in temporal processing obtained in other studies from our laboratory. Hence, we have no evidence that AUT00063 improves temporal processing for the doses and patient population employed.

Cochlear implant (CI) users usually exhibit marked across-electrode differences in detection thresholds with "focused" modes of stimulation, such as partial-tripolar (pTP) mode. This may reflect differences either in local neural survival or in the distance of the electrodes from the modiolus. To shed light on these two explanations, we compared stimulus-detection thresholds and gap-detection thresholds (GDTs) at comfortably loud levels for at least four electrodes in each of ten Advanced Bionics CI users, using 1031-pps pulse trains. The electrodes selected for each user had a wide range of stimulus-detection thresholds in pTP mode. We also measured across-electrode variations in both stimulus-detection and gap-detection tasks in monopolar (MP) mode. Both stimulus-detection and gap-detection thresholds correlated across modes. However, there was no significant correlation between stimulus-detection and gap-detection thresholds in either mode. Hence, gap-detection thresholds likely tap a source of across-electrode variation additional to, or different from, that revealed by stimulus-detection thresholds. Stimulus-detection thresholds were significantly lower for apical than for basal electrodes in both modes; this was only true for gap detection in pTP mode. Finally, although the across-electrode standard deviation in stimulus-detection thresholds was greater in pTP than in MP mode, the reliability of these differences--assessed by dividing the across-electrode standard deviation by the standard deviation across adaptive runs for each electrode--was similar for the two modes; this metric was also similar across modes for gap detection. Hence across-electrode differences can be revealed using clinically available MP stimulation, with a reliability comparable to that observed with focused stimulation.

A series of experiments investigated potential changes in temporal processing during the months following activation of a cochlear implant (CI) and as a function of stimulus level. Experiment 1 tested patients on the day of implant activation and 2 and 6 months later. All stimuli were presented using direct stimulation of a single apical electrode. The dependent variables were rate discrimination ratios (RDRs) for pulse trains with rates centred on 120 pulses per second (pps), obtained using an adaptive procedure, and a measure of the upper limit of temporal pitch, obtained using a pitch-ranking procedure. All stimuli were presented at their most comfortable level (MCL). RDRs decreased from 1.23 to 1.16 and the upper limit increased from 357 to 485 pps from 0 to 2 months post-activation, with no overall change from 2 to 6 months. Because MCLs and hence the testing level increased across sessions, two further experiments investigated whether the performance changes observed across sessions could be due to level differences. Experiment 2 re-tested a subset of subjects at 9 months post-activation, using current levels similar to those used at 0 months. Although the stimuli sounded softer, some subjects showed lower RDRs and/or higher upper limits at this re-test. Experiment 3 measured RDRs and the upper limit for a separate group of subjects at levels equal to 60 %, 80 % and 100 % of the dynamic range. RDRs decreased with increasing level. The upper limit increased with increasing level for most subjects, with two notable exceptions. Implications of the results for temporal plasticity are discussed, along with possible influences of the effects of level and of across-session learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]