Reduced acoustic and electric integration in concurrent-vowel recognition

The present study used concurrent-vowel recognition to measure integration efficiency of combined acoustic and electric stimulation in eight actual cochlear-implant subjects who had normal or residual low-frequency acoustic hearing contralaterally. Although these subjects could recognize single vowels (>90% correct) with either electric or combined stimulation, their performance degraded significantly in concurrent-vowel recognition. Compared with previous simulation results using normal-hearing subjects, the present subjects produced similar performance with acoustic or electric stimulation alone, but significantly lower performance with combined stimulation. A probabilistic model found reduced integration efficiency between acoustic and electric stimulation in the present subjects. The integration efficiency was negatively correlated with residual acoustic hearing in the non-implanted ear and duration of deafness in the implanted ear. The present result suggests a central origin of the integration deficit and that this integration be evaluated and considered in future management of hearing impairment and design of auditory prostheses

Auditory Nerve Fiber Responses to Combined Acoustic and Electric Stimulation

Persons with a prosthesis implanted in a cochlea with residual acoustic sensitivity can, in some cases, achieve better speech perception with “hybrid” stimulation than with either acoustic or electric stimulation presented alone. Such improvements may involve “across auditory-nerve fiber” processes within central nuclei of the auditory system and within-fiber interactions at the level of the auditory nerve. Our study explored acoustic–electric interactions within feline auditory nerve fibers (ANFs) so as to address two goals. First, we sought to better understand recent results that showed non-monotonic recovery of the electrically evoked compound action potential (ECAP) following acoustic masking (Nourski et al. 2007, Hear. Res. 232:87–103). We hypothesized that post-masking changes in ANF temporal properties and responsiveness (spike rate) accounted for the ECAP results. We also sought to describe, more broadly, the changes in ANF responses that result from prior acoustic stimulation. Five response properties—spike rate, latency, jitter, spike amplitude, and spontaneous activity—were examined. Post-masking reductions in spike rate, within-fiber jitter and across-fiber variance in latency were found, with the changes in temporal response properties limited to ANFs with high spontaneous rates. Thus, our results suggest how non-monotonic ECAP recovery occurs for ears with spontaneous activity, but cannot account for that pattern of recovery when there is no spontaneous activity, including the results from the presumably deafened ears used in the Nourski et al. (2007) study. Finally, during simultaneous (electric+acoustic) stimulation, the degree of electrically driven spike activity had a strong influence on spike rate, but did not affect spike jitter, which apparently was determined by the acoustic noise stimulus or spontaneous activity

Electrical Excitation of the Acoustically Sensitive Auditory Nerve: Single-Fiber Responses to Electric Pulse Trains

Nearly all studies on auditory-nerve responses to electric stimuli have been conducted using chemically deafened animals so as to more realistically model the implanted human ear that has typically been profoundly deaf. However, clinical criteria for implantation have recently been relaxed. Ears with “residual” acoustic sensitivity are now being implanted, calling for the systematic evaluation of auditory-nerve responses to electric stimuli as well as combined electric and acoustic stimuli in acoustically sensitive ears. This article presents a systematic investigation of single-fiber responses to electric stimuli in acoustically sensitive ears. Responses to 250 pulse/s electric pulse trains were collected from 18 cats. Properties such as threshold, dynamic range, and jitter were found to differ from those of deaf ears. Other types of fiber activity observed in acoustically sensitive ears (i.e., spontaneous activity and electrophonic responses) were found to alter the temporal coding of electric stimuli. The electrophonic response, which was shown to greatly change the information encoded by spike intervals, also exhibited fast adaptation relative to that observed in the “direct” response to electric stimuli. More complex responses, such as “buildup” (increased responsiveness to successive pulses) and “bursting” (alternating periods of responsiveness and unresponsiveness) were observed. Our findings suggest that bursting is a response unique to sustained electric stimulation in ears with functional hair cells