Refractory properties of auditory brain-stem responses evoked by electrical stimulation of human cochlear nucleus: evidence of neural generators

Electrically evoked auditory responses: A classification for brainstem implant placement in Neurofibromatosis Type 2

OBJECTIVE

In auditory brainstem implant (ABI) surgery, array placement may be optimized by electrophysiological information of adequate brainstem activation gained from electrically evoked auditory brainstem responses (EABR). This study aims 1) to characterize in detail the EABR from ABI implantation, 2) to introduce an EABR Classification Scheme, and 3) to analyze data for their correlation with individual patients' findings.

METHODS

Out of a continuous series of 54 patients who received an ABI between 2005 and 2019, 23 Neurofibromatosis Type 2 patients with complete documentation of 154 recordings were selected for offline analysis and for development and evaluation of a new EABR Classification Scheme comprising Class A: three vertex positive peaks, Class B:two peaks, Class C: a combination of one peak and a second melted double peak, Class D: one sole vertex positive peak and Class E: no peaks.

RESULTS

All 23 subjects showed EABR at final ABI position and experienced auditory sensations at first activation. The most frequent morphology consisted of two peaks, Classes B and C. Identified mean latencies were for P1 0.42 ms (±0.095), P2 1.42 ms (±0.244) and P3 2.41 ms (±0.329). Peak latencies correlated positively with tumor extensions (p < 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides clear instructions on optimal EABR performance and evaluation.

SIGNIFICANCE

The new EABR Classification Scheme relies on a fast "online" identification of vertex positive peaks at the estimated post-artifact phase. The variability in EABR morphology provides an individual snapshot of the actual structural and functional status of the brainstem.

Ten-year follow-up of auditory brainstem implants: From intra-operative electrical auditory brainstem responses to perceptual results

The auditory brainstem implant (ABI) can provide hearing sensation to individuals where the auditory nerve is damaged. However, patient outcomes with the ABI are typically much poorer than those for cochlear implant recipients. A major limitation to ABI outcomes is the number of implanted electrodes that can produce auditory responses to electric stimulation. One of the greatest challenges in ABI surgery is the intraoperative positioning of the electrode paddle, which must fit snugly within the cochlear nucleus complex. While there presently is no optimal procedure for intraoperative electrode positioning, intraoperative assessments may provide useful information regarding viable electrodes that may be included in patients' clinical speech processors. Currently, there is limited knowledge regarding the relationship between intraoperative data and post-operative outcomes. Furthermore, the relationship between initial ABI stimulation with and long-term perceptual outcomes is unknown. In this retrospective study, we reviewed intraoperative electrophysiological data from 24 ABI patients (16 adults and 8 children) obtained with two stimulation approaches that differed in terms of neural recruitment. The interoperative electrophysiological recordings were used to estimate the number of viable electrodes and were compared to the number of activated electrodes at initial clinical fitting. Regardless of the stimulation approach, the intraoperative estimate of viable electrodes greatly overestimated the number of active electrodes in the clinical map. The number of active electrodes was associated with long-term perceptual outcomes. Among patients with 10-year follow-up, at least 11/21 active electrodes were needed to support good word detection and closed-set recognition and 14/21 electrodes to support good open-set word and sentence recognition. Perceptual outcomes were better for children than for adults, despite a lower number of active electrodes.

Detailed insight in intraoperative eABR measurements to assist auditory brainstem implantation in a patient with neurofibromatosis type 2

Auditory brainstem implant (ABI) is used to provide auditory sensations in patients with neurofibromatosis type 2 who lost their hearing due to a surgical removal of the tumor. ABI surgery, implant activation and follow-up sessions present unique challenges including the exact placement of the electrode pad in the lateral recess of the IVth ventricle, identification of electrodes that trigger non-auditory sensation and their deactivation which lowers the number of electrodes responsible for hearing, changes of T- and C-levels across follow-up sessions. We present a complete procedure using an example case starting from the surgical part with the detailed description of intraoperative eABR measurement as a guidance for pad placement to the ABI activation and first fitting sessions with auditory sensation assessment. Since the first ABI electrode pad position presented non-satisfactory intraoperative eABR results it was decided to move the pad slightly which resulted in better eABR (more electrodes with auditory responses). The discussed patient demonstrated great auditory and speech perception results after the first ABI fitting (which included three sessions over 2 consecutive days). Repositioning of the ABI electrode pad during the surgery was carried out taking into account the intraoperative eABR results and this led to an overall positive outcome for the patient. The placement of ABI electrode pad is crucial for later auditory results. This study provides detailed insight in this very specialized procedure that is not performed in every clinic and adds to the knowledge of intraoperative navigation using eABR measurements during ABI surgery.

Effect of anesthesia on evoked auditory responses in pediatric auditory brainstem implant surgery

OBJECTIVE

Electrically evoked auditory brainstem responses (EABR) guide placement of the multichannel auditory brainstem implant (ABI) array during surgery. EABRs are also recorded under anesthesia in nontumor pediatric ABI recipients prior to device activation to confirm placement and guide device programming. We examine the influence of anesthesia on evoked response morphology in pediatric ABI users by comparing intraoperative with postoperative EABR recordings.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review.

METHODS

Seven children underwent ABI surgery by way of retrosigmoid craniotomy. General anesthesia included inhaled sevoflurane induction and propofol maintenance during which EABRs were recorded to confirm accurate positioning of the ABI. A mean of 7.7 ± 2.8 weeks following surgery, the ABI was activated under general anesthesia or sedation (dexmedetomidine) and EABR recordings were made. A qualitative analysis of intraoperative and postoperative waveform morphology was performed.

RESULTS

Seven subjects (mean age 20.6 months) underwent nine ABI surgeries (seven primary, two revisions) and nine activations. EABRs were observed in eight of nine postoperative recordings. In three cases, intraoperative EABRs during general anesthesia were similar to postoperative EABRs with sedation. In one case, sevoflurane and propofol were used for intra- and postoperative recordings, and waveforms were also similar. In four cases, amplitude and latency changes were observed for intraoperative versus postoperative EABRs.

CONCLUSION

Similarity of EABR morphology in the anesthetized versus sedated condition suggests that anesthesia does not have a large effect on far-field evoked potentials. Changes in EABR waveform morphology observed postoperatively may be influenced by other factors such as movements of the surface array.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4 Laryngoscope, 130:507-513, 2020.

Auditory brainstem implant: electrophysiologic responses and subject perception

OBJECTIVES

The primary aim of this study was to compare the perceptual sensation produced by bipolar electrical stimulation of auditory brainstem implant (ABI) electrodes with the morphology of electrically evoked responses elicited by the same bipolar stimulus in the same unanesthetized, postsurgical state. Secondary aims were to (1) examine the relationships between sensations elicited by the bipolar stimulation used for evoked potential recording and the sensations elicited by the monopolar pulse-train stimulation used by the implant processor, and (2) examine the relationships between evoked potential morphology (elicited by bipolar stimulation) to the sensations elicited by monopolar stimulation.

DESIGN

Electrically evoked early-latency and middle-latency responses to bipolar, biphasic low-rate pulses were recorded postoperatively in four adults with ABIs. Before recording, the perceptual sensations elicited by these bipolar stimuli were obtained and categorized as (1) auditory sensations only, (2) mixed sensations (both auditory and nonauditory), (3) side effect (nonauditory sensations), or (4) no sensation. In addition, the sensations elicited by monopolar higher-rate pulse-train stimuli similar to that used in processor programming were measured for all electrodes in the ABI array and classified using the same categories. Comparisons were made between evoked response morphology, bipolar stimulation sensation, and monopolar stimulation sensation.

RESULTS

Sensations were classified for 33 bipolar pairs as follows: 21 pairs were auditory, 6 were mixed, 5 were side effect, and 1 was no sensation. When these sensations were compared with the electrically evoked response morphology for these signals, P3 of the electrically evoked auditory brainstem response (eABR) and the presence of a middle-latency positive wave, usually between 15 and 25 msec (electrical early middle-latency response [eMLR]), were only present when the perceptual sensation had an auditory component (either auditory or mixed pairs). The presence of other waves in the early-latency response such as N1 or P2 or a positive wave after 4 msec did not distinguish between only auditory or only nonauditory sensations. For monopolar stimulation, 42 were classified as auditory, 16 were mixed, and 26 were classified as side effect or no sensation. When bipolar sensations were compared with monopolar sensations for the 21 bipolar pairs categorized as auditory, 7 pairs had monopolar sensations of auditory for both electrodes, 9 pairs had only one electrode with a monopolar sensation of auditory, with the remainder having neither electrode as auditory. Of 6 bipolar pairs categorized as mixed, 3 had monopolar auditory sensations for one of the electrodes. When monopolar stimulation was compared with evoked potential morphology elicited by bipolar stimulation, P3 and the eMLR were more likely to be present when one or both of the electrodes in the bipolar pair elicited an auditory or mixed sensation with monopolar stimulation and were less likely to occur when neither of the electrodes had an auditory monopolar sensation. Again, other eABR waves did not distinguish between auditory and nonauditory sensations.

CONCLUSIONS

ABI electrodes that are associated with auditory sensations elicited by bipolar stimulation are more likely to elicit evoked responses with a P3 wave or a middle-latency wave. P3 of the eABR and M15-25 of the eMLR are less likely to be present if neither electrode of the bipolar pair evoked an auditory sensation with monopolar stimulation.

Auditory responses to electric and infrared neural stimulation of the rat cochlear nucleus

In an effort to improve the auditory brainstem implant, a prosthesis in which user outcomes are modest, we applied electric and infrared neural stimulation (INS) to the cochlear nucleus in a rat animal model. Electric stimulation evoked regions of neural activation in the inferior colliculus and short-latency, multipeaked auditory brainstem responses (ABRs). Pulsed INS, delivered to the surface of the cochlear nucleus via an optical fiber, evoked broad neural activation in the inferior colliculus. Strongest responses were recorded when the fiber was placed at lateral positions on the cochlear nucleus, close to the temporal bone. INS-evoked ABRs were multipeaked but longer in latency than those for electric stimulation; they resembled the responses to acoustic stimulation. After deafening, responses to electric stimulation persisted, whereas those to INS disappeared, consistent with a reported "optophonic" effect, a laser-induced acoustic artifact. Thus, for deaf individuals who use the auditory brainstem implant, INS alone did not appear promising as a new approach.

Intraoperative monitoring for hearing preservation and restoration in acoustic neuroma surgery

The present article reports on our experience with hearing preservation during 158 acoustic neuroma (AN) operations via the retrosigmoid-transmeatal (RS-TM) approach with the aid of intraoperative auditory monitoring. Several auditory monitoring methods are described. Of these, the bipolar cochlear nerve action potential (CNAP) was found to be the most helpful in preserving hearing. Of 106 patients with useful hearing preoperatively, more than 50% had useful hearing after surgery. Electrical auditory brainstem responses were useful in the placement of an auditory brain stem implant (ABI) in 4 patients with neurofibromatosis type 2 (NF2). All 4 reported speech perception benefit and use their ABIs regularly in their lives. It is our firm belief that intraoperative auditory monitoring has a pivotal role in the preservation and restoration of hearing in AN surgery.

Thirty minutes mobile phone use has no short-term adverse effects on central auditory pathways

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether pulsed high-frequency electromagnetic field (pulsed EM field) emitted by a mobile phone for 30 min has short-term adverse effects on the human central auditory system.

METHODS

We studied the auditory brainstem response (ABR), the ABR recovery function and middle latency response (MLR) before and after using a mobile phone for 30 min in 15 normal hearing volunteers.

RESULTS

None of the 3 measures were affected by exposure to pulsed EM field emitted by a mobile phone for 30 min.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the ABR and MLR methods utilized in the study, we conclude that 30 min mobile phone use has no short-term adverse effects on the human auditory system.

Far-field responses to stimulation of the cochlear nucleus by microsurgically placed penetrating and surface electrodes in the cat

OBJECT

A new generation of penetrating electrodes for auditory brainstem implants is on the verge of being introduced into clinical practice. This study was designed to compare electrically evoked auditory brainstem responses (EABRs) to stimulation of the cochlear nucleus (CN) by microsurgically implanted surface electrodes and insertion electrodes (INSELs) with stimulation areas of identical size.

METHODS

Via a lateral suboccipital approach, arrays of surface and penetrating microelectrodes with geometric stimulation areas measuring 4,417 microm2 (diameter 75 microm) were placed over and inserted into the CN in 10 adult cats. After recording the auditory brainstem response (ABR) at the mastoid process, the CN, and the level of the inferior colliculus, EABRs to stimulation of the CN were recorded using biphasic, charge-balanced stimuli with phase durations of 80 microsec, 160 microsec, and 240 microsec at a repetition rate of 22.3 Hz. Waveform, threshold, maximum amplitude, and the dynamic range of the responses were compared for surface and penetrating electrodes. The EABR waveforms that appeared for both types of stimulation resembled each other closely. The mean impedance was slightly lower (30 +/- 3.4 kohm compared with 31.7 +/- 4.5 kohm, at 10 kHz), but the mean EABR threshold was significantly higher (51.8 microA compared with 40.5 microA, t = 3.5, p = 0.002) for surface electrode arrays as opposed to penetrating electrode arrays. Due to lower saturation levels of the INSEL array, dynamic ranges were almost identical between the two types of stimulation. Sectioning of the eighth cranial nerve did not abolish EABRs.

CONCLUSIONS

Microsurgical insertion of electrodes into the CN complex may be guided and monitored using techniques similar to those applied for implantation of surface electrodes. Lower thresholds and almost equivalent dynamic ranges indicate that a more direct access to secondary auditory neurons is achieved using penetrating electrodes.

Organization of the human superior olivary complex

The distinctive morphology of the human superior olivary complex reflects its primate origins, but functional evidence suggests that it plays a role in auditory spatial mapping which is similar to olivary function in other mammalian species. It seems likely that the well-developed human medial olivary nucleus is the basis for extraction of interaural time and phase differences. The much smaller human lateral olivary nucleus probably functions in analysis of interaural differences in frequency and intensity, but the absence of a human nucleus of the trapezoid body implies some difference in the mechanisms of this function. A window on human olivary function is provided by the evoked auditory brainstem response (ABR), including its binaural interaction component (BIC). Anatomical, electrophysiological, and histopathological studies suggest that ABR waves IV and V are generated by axonal pathways at the level of the superior olivary complex. Periolivary cell groups are prominent in the human olivary complex. The cell groups located medial, lateral, and dorsal are similar to periolivary nuclei of other mammals, but the periolivary nucleus at the rostral pole of the human olivary complex is very large by mammalian standards. Within the periolivary system, immunostaining for neurotransmitter-related substances allows us to identify populations of medial and lateral olivocochlear neurons. The human olivocochlear system is unique among mammals in the relatively small size of its lateral efferent component. Some consideration is given to the idea that the integration provided by periolivary cell groups, particularly modulation of the periphery by the olivocochlear system, is an extension of the spatial mapping function of the main olivary nuclei.

Activating separate ascending auditory pathways produces different human thalamic/cortical responses

When auditory nerve function is lost due to surgical removal of bilateral acoustic tumors in cases of neurofibromatosis type 2, a sense of hearing may be restored by means of an auditory brainstem implant (ABI), which electrically stimulates the cochlear nucleus. Electrically evoked auditory brainstem responses recorded from ABI subjects exhibit a variety of waveforms due to the presence or absence of different components. Evidently, ABI stimulation activates different ascending auditory pathways in different individuals. This study examined whether such differences at the brainstem level are associated with corresponding differences at higher levels. Multichannel recordings of electrically evoked middle-latency and late auditory responses were obtained from two ABI subjects whose very different electrically evoked auditory brainstem responses represent distinct categories of waveform morphology. The waveforms of both types of response were qualitatively similar in that for each condition tested there were corresponding main peaks and troughs. Quantitatively, however, there were differences in the scalp distributions and magnitudes of all components present. One subject had distributions suggesting bilateral activation and an N1-P2 complex of large amplitude, whereas the other subject had distributions suggesting unilateral activation contralateral to the side of stimulation and an N1-P2 complex of small amplitude. The differences suggest that activation of different ascending pathways in the auditory system results in different spatial and temporal patterns of neural activity in the thalamic and/or cortical auditory areas.