The relationship between electrical auditory brainstem responses and perceptual thresholds in Digisonic^® SP cochlear implant users

References

• Abbas P.J., Brown C.J. 1991. Electrically evoked auditory brainstem response: growth of response with current level. Hearing Research, 51(1): 123–137. doi:10.1016/0378-5955(91)90011-W.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allum J.H.J., Greisiger R., Probst R. 2002. Relationship of intraoperative electrically evoked stapedius reflex thresholds to maximum comfortable loudness levels of children with cochlear implants: Relaciones Entre Los Umbrales Transquirürgicos Del Reflejo Estapedial Eléctricamente Evocado y Los Niveles Máximos de Sonoridad Agradable En Niños Con Implantes Cocleares. International Journal of Audiology, 41(2): 93–99.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bahmer A., Baumann U. 2011a. Application of triphasic pulses with adjustable phase amplitude ratio (PAR) for cochlear ECAP recording: II. recovery functions'. Journal of Neuroscience Methods. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016502701100728X.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bahmer A., Baumann U. 2011b. Application of triphasic pulses with adjustable phase amplitude ratio (PAR) for cochlear ECAP recording: I. amplitude growth functions. Journal of Neuroscience Methods. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165027011007278.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bahmer A., Peter O., Baumann U. 2010. Recording and analysis of electrically evoked compound action potentials (ECAPs) with MED-EL cochlear implants and different artifact reduction strategies in Matlab. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 191(1): 66–74. doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2010.06.008.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Botros A., Psarros C. 2010. Neural response telemetry reconsidered: II. the influence of neural population on the ECAP recovery function and refractoriness. Ear and Hearing, 31(3): 380–391. doi:10.1097/AUD.0b013e3181cb41aa.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bresnihan M., Norman G., Scott F., Viani L. 2001. Measurement of comfort levels by means of electrical stapedial reflex in children. Archives of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, 127(8): 963.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown C.J., Abbas P.J., Fryauf-Bertschy H., Kelsay D., Gantz B.J. 1994. Intraoperative and postoperative electrically evoked auditory brain stem responses in nucleus cochlear implant users: implications for the fitting process. Ear and Hearing, 15(2): 168–176.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown C.J., Hughes M.L., Luk B., Abbas P.J., Wolaver A., Gervais J. 2000. The relationship between EAP and EABR thresholds and levels used to program the nucleus 24 speech processor: data from adults. Ear and Hearing, 21(2): 151.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clay K.M.S., Brown C.J. 2007. Adaptation of the electrically evoked compound action potential (ECAP) recorded from nucleus CI24 cochlear implant users. Ear and Hearing, 28(6): 850.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dorman M.F., Smith L.M., Dankowski K., McCandless G., Parkin J.L. 1992. Long-term measures of electrode impedance and auditory thresholds for the ineraid cochlear implant. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 35(5): 1126–1130.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Eisen M.D., Franck K.H. 2004. Electrically evoked compound action potential amplitude growth functions and HiResolution programming levels inpediatric CII implant subjects. Ear and Hearing, 25(6): 528.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gallégo S., Garnier S., Micheyl C., Truy E., Morgon A., Collet L. 1999. Loudness growth functions and EABR characteristics in Digisonic cochlear implantees. Acta Oto-laryngologica, 119(2): 234–238. doi:10.1080/00016489950181738.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gordon K.A., Papsin B.C., Harrison R.V. 2003. Activity-dependent developmental plasticity of the auditory brain stem in children who use cochlear implants. Ear and Hearing, 24(6): 485.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gordon K.A., Papsin B.C., Harrison R.V. 2004. Toward a battery of behavioral and objective measures to achieve optimal cochlear implant stimulation levels in children. Ear and Hearing, 25(5): 447.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gordon K.A., Papsin B.C., Harrison R.V. 2006. An evoked potential study of the developmental time course of the auditory nerve and brainstem in children using cochlear implants. Audiology and Neurotology, 11(1): 7–23. doi:10.1159/000088851.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holstad B.A., Sonneveldt V.G., Fears B.T., Davidson L.S., Aaron R.J., Richter M., et al. 2009. Relation of electrically evoked compound action potential thresholds to behavioral T-and C-levels in children with cochlear implants. Ear and Hearing, 30(1): 115.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hughes M.L., Brown C.J., Abbas P.J., Wolaver A.A., Gervais J.P. 2000. Comparison of EAP thresholds with MAP levels in the nucleus 24 cochlear implant: data from children. Ear and Hearing, 21(2): 164.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hughes M.L., Vander Werff K.R., Brown C.J., Abbas P.J., Kelsay D.M.R., Teagle H.F.B., et al. 2001. A longitudinal study of electrode impedance, the electrically evoked compound action potential, and behavioral measures in Nucleus 24 cochlear implant users. Ear and Hearing, 22(6): 471.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirby B., Brown C., Abbas P., Etler C., O'Brien S. 2012. Relationships between electrically evoked potentials and loudness growth in bilateral cochlear implant users. Ear and Hearing, 33(3): 389–398. doi:10.1097/AUD.0b013e318239adb8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Litvak L.M., Smith Z.M., Delgutte B., Eddington D.K. 2003. Desynchronization of electrically evoked auditory-nerve activity by high-frequency pulse trains of long duration. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 114(4 Pt 1): 2066–2078.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macherey O., Van Wieringen A., Carlyon R.P., Deeks J.M., Wouters J. 2006. Asymmetric pulses in cochlear implants: effects of pulse shape, polarity, and rate. JARO – Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology, 7(3): 253–266.
   Google Scholar
• McKay C.M., Fewster L., Dawson P. 2005. A different approach to using neural response telemetry for automated cochlear implant processor programming. Ear and Hearing, 26(4): 38S.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller C.A., Brown C.J., Abbas P.J., Chi S.L. 2008. The clinical application of potentials evoked from the peripheral auditory system. Hearing Research, 242(1): 184–197.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morita T., Naito Y., Hirai T., Yamaguchi S., Ito J. 2003. The relationship between the intraoperative ECAP threshold and postoperative behavioral levels: the difference between postlingually deafened adults and prelingually deafened pediatric cochlear implant users. European Archives of Oto-rhino-laryngology, 260(2): 67–72.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pfingst B.E. 1990. Changes over time in thresholds for electrical stimulation of the cochlea. Hearing Research, 50(1–2): 225–236. doi:10.1016/0378-5955(90)90047-S.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Picton T.W., Hillyard S.A., Krausz H.I., Galambos R. 1974. Human auditory evoked potentials. I: evaluation of components. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 36: 179–190.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rubinstein J.T, Wilson B.S., Finley C.C., Abbas P.J. 1999. Pseudospontaneous activity: stochastic independence of auditory nerve fibers with electrical stimulation. Hearing Research, 127(1–2) 108–118. doi:10.1016/S0378-5955(98)00185-3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shallop J.K., Beiter A.L., Goin D.W., Mischke R.E. 1990. Electrically evoked auditory brain stem responses (EABR) and middle latency responses (EMLR) obtained from patients with the Nucleus multichannel cochlear implant. Ear and Hearing, 11(1): 5–15.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharma A., Dorman M.F. 2006. Central auditory development in children with cochlear implants: clinical implications. Advances in Oto-rhino-laryngology, 64: 66–88.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Smoorenburg G.F., Willeboer C., van Dijk J.E. 2002. Speech perception in Nucleus CI24M cochlear implant users with processor settings based on electrically evoked compound action potential thresholds. Audiology and Neurotology, 7(6): 335–347.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thai-Van H., Cozma S., Boutitie F., Disant F., Truy E., Collet L. 2007. The pattern of auditory brainstem response wave V maturation in cochlear-implanted children. Clinical Neurophysiology, 118(3): 676–689. doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2006.11.010.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Truy E., Gallego S., Chanal J.M., Collet L., Morgon A. 1998. Correlation between electrical auditory brainstem response and perceptual thresholds in Digisonic cochlear implant users. The Laryngoscope, 108(4): 554–559.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Undurraga J.A., Carlyon R.P., Macherey O., Wouters J., van Wieringen A. 2012. Spread of excitation varies for different electrical pulse shapes and stimulation modes in cochlear implants. Hearing Research, 290(1–2): 21–36. doi:10.1016/j.heares.2012.05.003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar