Search

While noninvasive brain stimulation is convenient and cost effective, its utility is limited by the substantial distance between scalp electrodes and their intended neural targets in the head. The tympanic membrane, or eardrum, is a thin flap of skin deep in an orifice of the head that may serve as a port for improved efficiency of noninvasive stimulation. Here we chose the cochlea as a target because it resides in the densest bone of the skull and is adjacent to many deep-brain-stimulation structures. We also tested the hypothesis that noninvasive electric stimulation of the cochlea may restore neural activities that are missing in acoustic stimulation. We placed an electrode in the ear canal or on the tympanic membrane in 25 human adults (10 females) and compared their stimulation efficiency by characterizing the electrically-evoked auditory sensation. Relative to ear canal stimulation, tympanic membrane stimulation was four times more likely to produce an auditory percept, required eight times lower electric current to reach the threshold and produced two-to-four times more linear suprathreshold responses. We further measured tinnitus suppression in 14 of the 25 subjects who had chronic tinnitus. Compared with ear canal stimulation, tympanic membrane stimulation doubled both the probability (22% vs. 55%) and the amount (-15% vs. -34%) of tinnitus suppression. These findings extended previous work comparing evoked perception and tinnitus suppression between electrodes placed in the ear canal and on the scalp. Together, the previous and present results suggest that the efficiency of conventional scalp-based noninvasive electric stimulation can be improved by at least one order of magnitude via tympanic membrane stimulation. This increased efficiency is most likely due to the shortened distance between the electrode placed on the tympanic membrane and the targeted cochlea. The present findings have implications for the management of tinnitus by offering a potential alternative to interventions using invasive electrical stimulation such as cochlear implantation, or other non-invasive transcranial electrical stimulation methods., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest FGZ owns stock in Axonics, DiaNavi, Nurotron, Syntiant, Velox and Xense. HRD has equity interest in Cactus Medical, Mind:Set Technologies, and is a consultant to NXT Biomedical and Alcon. The other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Tinnitus is a sound heard by 15% of the general population in the absence of any external sound. Because external sounds can sometimes mask tinnitus, tinnitus is assumed to affect the perception of external sounds, leading to hypotheses such as "tinnitus filling in the temporal gap" in animal models and "tinnitus inducing hearing difficulty" in human subjects. Here we compared performance in temporal, spectral, intensive, masking and speech-in-noise perception tasks between 45 human listeners with chronic tinnitus (18 females and 27 males with a range of ages and degrees of hearing loss) and 27 young, normal-hearing listeners without tinnitus (11 females and 16 males). After controlling for age, hearing loss, and stimulus variables, we discovered that, contradictory to the widely held assumption, tinnitus does not interfere with the perception of external sounds in 32 of the 36 measures. We interpret the present result to reflect a bottom-up pathway for the external sound and a separate top-down pathway for tinnitus. We propose that these two perceptual pathways can be independently modulated by attention, which leads to the asymmetrical interaction between external and internal sounds, and several other puzzling tinnitus phenomena such as discrepancy in loudness between tinnitus rating and matching. The present results suggest not only a need for new theories involving attention and central noise in animal tinnitus models but also a shift in focus from treating tinnitus to managing its comorbid conditions when addressing complaints about hearing difficulty in individuals with tinnitus. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Tinnitus, or ringing in the ears, is a neurologic disorder that affects 15% of the general population. Here we discovered an asymmetrical relationship between tinnitus and external sounds: although external sounds have been widely used to cover up tinnitus, tinnitus does not impair, and sometimes even improves, the perception of external sounds. This counterintuitive discovery contradicts the general belief held by scientists, clinicians, and even individuals with tinnitus themselves, who often report hearing difficulty, especially in noise. We attribute the counterintuitive discovery to two independent pathways: the bottom-up perception of external sounds and the top-down perception of tinnitus. Clinically, the present work suggests a shift in focus from treating tinnitus itself to treating its comorbid conditions and secondary effects., (Copyright © 2020 the authors.)

Noninvasive transcranial or minimally invasive transtympanic electric stimulation may offer a desirable treatment option for tinnitus because it can activate the deafferented auditory nerve fibers while posing little to no risk to hearing. Here, we built a flexible research interface to generate and control accurately charge-balanced current stimulation as well as a head-mounted instrument capable of holding a transtympanic electrode steady for hours. We then investigated the short-term effect of a limited set of electric stimulation parameters on tinnitus in 10 adults with chronic tinnitus. The preliminary results showed that 63% of conditions of electric stimulation produced some degree of tinnitus reduction, with total disappearance of tinnitus in six subjects in response to at least one condition. The present study also found significant side effects such as visual, tactile, and even pain sensations during electric stimulation. In addition to masking and residual inhibition, neuroplasticity is likely involved in the observed tinnitus reduction. To translate the present electric stimulation into a safe and effective tinnitus treatment option, we need to optimize stimulation parameters that activate the deafferented auditory nerve fibers and reliably suppress tinnitus, with minimal side effects and tolerable sensations. Noninvasive or minimally invasive electric stimulation can be integrated with sound therapy, invasive cochlear implants, or other forms of coordinated stimulation to provide a systematic strategy for tinnitus treatment or even a cure.

Attention plays an important role in not only the awareness and perception of tinnitus but also its interactions with external sounds. Recent evidence suggests that attention is heightened in the tinnitus brain, likely as a result of relatively local cortical changes specific to deafferentation sites or global changes that help maintain normal cognitive capabilities in individuals with hearing loss. However, most electrophysiological studies have used passive listening paradigms to probe the tinnitus brain and produced mixed results in terms of finding a distinctive biomarker for tinnitus. Here, we designed a selective attention task, in which human adults attended to one of two interleaved tonal (500 Hz and 5 kHz) sequences. In total, 16 tinnitus (5 females) and 13 age- and hearing-matched control (8 females) subjects participated in the study, with the tinnitus subjects matching the tinnitus pitch to 5.4 kHz (range = 1.9-10.8 kHz). Cortical responses were recorded in both passive and attentive listening conditions, producing no differences in P1, N1, and P2 between the tinnitus and control subjects under any conditions. However, a different pattern of results emerged when the difference was examined between the attended and unattended responses. This attention-modulated cortical response was significantly greater in the tinnitus than control subjects: 3.9-times greater for N1 at 5 kHz (95% CI: 2.9 to 5.0, p = 0.007, ηp2 = 0.24) and 3.0 for P2 at 500 Hz (95% CI: 1.9 to 4.5, p = 0.026, ηp2 = 0.17). We interpreted the greater N1 modulation as local neural changes specific to the tinnitus frequency and the greater P2 as global changes to hearing loss. These two cortical measures were used to differentiate between the tinnitus and control subjects, producing 83.3% sensitivity and 76.9% specificity (AUC = 0.81, p = 0.006). These results suggest that the tinnitus brain is more plastic than that of the matched non-tinnitus controls and that the attention-modulated cortical response can be developed as a clinically meaningful biomarker for tinnitus.

While noninvasive brain stimulation is convenient and cost effective, its utility is limited by the substantial distance between scalp electrodes and their intended neural targets in the head. The tympanic membrane, or eardrum, is a thin flap of skin deep in an orifice of the head that may serve as a port for improved efficiency of noninvasive stimulation. Here we chose the cochlea as a target because it resides in the densest bone of the skull and is adjacent to many deep-brain-stimulation structures. We also tested the hypothesis that noninvasive electric stimulation of the cochlea may restore neural activities that are missing in acoustic stimulation. We placed an electrode in the ear canal or on the tympanic membrane in 25 human adults (10 females) and compared their stimulation efficiency by characterizing the electrically-evoked auditory sensation. Relative to ear canal stimulation, tympanic membrane stimulation was four times more likely to produce an auditory percept, required eight times lower electric current to reach the threshold and produced two-to-four times more linear suprathreshold responses. We further measured tinnitus suppression in 14 of the 25 subjects who had chronic tinnitus. Compared with ear canal stimulation, tympanic membrane stimulation doubled both the probability (22% vs. 55%) and the amount (-15% vs. -34%) of tinnitus suppression. These findings extended previous work comparing evoked perception and tinnitus suppression between electrodes placed in the ear canal and on the scalp. Together, the previous and present results suggest that the efficiency of conventional scalp-based noninvasive electric stimulation can be improved by at least one order of magnitude via tympanic membrane stimulation. This increased efficiency is most likely due to the shortened distance between the electrode placed on the tympanic membrane and the targeted cochlea. The present findings have implications for the management of tinnitus by offering a potential alternative to interventions using invasive electrical stimulation such as cochlear implantation, or other non-invasive transcranial electrical stimulation methods.

Animal studies have discovered that noise, even at levels that produce no permanent threshold shift, may cause cochlear damage and selective nerve degeneration. A hallmark of such damage, or synaptopathy, is recovered threshold but reduced suprathreshold amplitude for the auditory brainstem response (ABR) wave I. The objective of the present study is to evaluate whether the ABR wave I amplitude or slope can be used to diagnose tinnitus in humans. A total of 43 human subjects, consisting of 21 with tinnitus and 22 without tinnitus, participated in the study. The subjects were on average 44 ± 24 (standard deviation) years old and 16 were female; a subgroup of 19 were young adults with normal audiograms from 125 to 8000 Hz. The ABR was measured using ear canal recording tiptrodes for clicks, 1000, 4000 and 8000 Hz tone bursts at 30, 50, and 70 dB nHL. Compared with control subjects, tinnitus subjects did not show reduced ABR wave I amplitude or slope in either the entire group of 21 tinnitus subjects or a subset of tinnitus subjects with normal audiograms. Despite the small sample size and diverse tinnitus population, the present result suggests that low signal-to-noise ratios in non-invasive measurement of the ABR limit its clinical utility in diagnosing tinnitus in humans.

Noninvasive transcranial or minimally invasive transtympanic electric stimulation may offer a desirable treatment option for tinnitus because it can activate the deafferented auditory nerve fibers while posing little to no risk to hearing. Here, we built a flexible research interface to generate and control accurately charge-balanced current stimulation as well as a head-mounted instrument capable of holding a transtympanic electrode steady for hours. We then investigated the short-term effect of a limited set of electric stimulation parameters on tinnitus in 10 adults with chronic tinnitus. The preliminary results showed that 63% of conditions of electric stimulation produced some degree of tinnitus reduction, with total disappearance of tinnitus in six subjects in response to at least one condition. The present study also found significant side effects such as visual, tactile, and even pain sensations during electric stimulation. In addition to masking and residual inhibition, neuroplasticity is likely involved in the observed tinnitus reduction. To translate the present electric stimulation into a safe and effective tinnitus treatment option, we need to optimize stimulation parameters that activate the deafferented auditory nerve fibers and reliably suppress tinnitus, with minimal side effects and tolerable sensations. Noninvasive or minimally invasive electric stimulation can be integrated with sound therapy, invasive cochlear implants, or other forms of coordinated stimulation to provide a systematic strategy for tinnitus treatment or even a cure.

Tinnitus is a sound heard by 15% of the general population in the absence of any external sound. Because external sounds can sometimes mask tinnitus, tinnitus is assumed to affect the perception of external sounds, leading to hypotheses such as "tinnitus filling in the temporal gap" in animal models and "tinnitus inducing hearing difficulty" in human subjects. Here we compared performance in temporal, spectral, intensive, masking and speech-in-noise perception tasks between 45 human listeners with chronic tinnitus (18 females and 27 males with a range of ages and degrees of hearing loss) and 27 young, normal- hearing listeners without tinnitus (11 females and 16 males). After controlling for age, hearing loss, and stimulus variables, we discovered that, contradictory to the widely held assumption, tinnitus does not interfere with the perception of external sounds in 32 of the 36 measures. We interpret the present result to reflect a bottom-up pathway for the external sound and a separate top-down pathway for tinnitus. We propose that these two perceptual pathways can be independently modulated by attention, which leads to the asymmetrical interaction between external and internal sounds, and several other puzzling tinnitus phenomena such as discrepancy in loudness between tinnitus rating and matching. The present results suggest not only a need for new theories involving attention and central noise in animal tinnitus models but also a shift in focus from treating tinnitus to managing its comorbid conditions when addressing complaints about hearing difficulty in individuals with tinnitus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]