Spread of activation and interaction between channels with multi-channel optogenetic stimulation in the mouse cochlea

For individuals with severe to profound hearing loss resulting from irreversibly damaged hair cells, cochlear implants can be used to restore hearing by delivering electrical stimulation directly to the spiral ganglion neurons. However, current spread lowers the spatial resolution of neural activation. Since light can be easily confined, optogenetics is a technique that has the potential to improve the precision of neural activation, whereby visible light is used to stimulate neurons that are modified with light-sensitive opsins. This study compares the spread of neural activity across the inferior colliculus of the auditory midbrain during electrical and optical stimulation in the cochlea of acutely deafened mice with opsin-modified spiral ganglion neurons (H134R variant of the channelrhodopsin-2). Monopolar electrical stimulation was delivered via each of four 0.2 mm wide platinum electrode rings at 0.6 mm centre-to-centre spacing, whereas 453 nm wavelength light was delivered via each of five 0.22 × 0.27 mm micro-light emitting diodes (LEDs) at 0.52 mm centre-to-centre spacing. Channel interactions were also quantified by threshold changes during simultaneous stimulation by pairs of electrodes or micro-LEDs at different distances between the electrodes (0.6, 1.2 and 1.8 mm) or micro-LEDs (0.52, 1.04, 1.56 and 2.08 mm). The spread of activation resulting from single channel optical stimulation was approximately half that of monopolar electrical stimulation as measured at two levels of discrimination above threshold (p<0.001), whereas there was no significant difference between optical stimulation in opsin-modified deafened mice and pure tone acoustic stimulation in normal-hearing mice. During simultaneous micro-LED stimulation, there were minimal channel interactions for all micro-LED spacings tested. For neighbouring micro-LEDs/electrodes, the relative influence on threshold was 13-fold less for optical stimulation compared electrical stimulation (p<0.05). The outcomes of this study show that the higher spatial precision of optogenetic stimulation results in reduced channel interaction compared to electrical stimulation, which could increase the number of independent channels in a cochlear implant. Increased spatial resolution and the ability to activate more than one channel simultaneously could lead to better speech perception in cochlear implant recipients.

Influence of the spread of electric field on neural excitation in cochlear implant users: Transimpedance and spread of excitation measurements

Channel interactions caused by spread of the intracochlear electric field and, thus, the spread of neural excitation constrain frequency selectivity and speech recognition in cochlear implant (CI) users. Studying the influence of the spread of electric field (SEF) on the spread of excitation (SOE) can help us better understand the electrical-neural interface. The primary aim of this study was to examine the influence of the SEF on the SOE. In 38 Nucleus (Cochlear Ltd. Sydney, Australia) CI recipients, we assessed the spatial SEF by measuring the voltage drop (transimpedance) and the SOE through neural responses (electrically evoked compound action potentials [eCAPs]) along the electrode array. Transimpedance was recorded using the monopolar (MP2) mode as the stimulation and recording mode. Biphasic square-wave pulses with an amplitude of 110 CL and duration of 37 µs were used for stimulation. SOE was measured at the probe active electrodes E5, E13, and E18. The stimulation amplitudes were set individually to the thresholds of the neural response telemetry (T-NRT), which were measured by the AutoNRT protocol. The transimpedance half-widths were between 0.00 electrodes and 8.55 electrodes. The SOE half-widths reached values between 0.54 electrodes and 5.70 electrodes. Considering individual transimpedance and SOE half-widths, the SEF and SOE showed a significant positive correlation only at electrode E13. Furthermore, this study shows a significant negative correlation of the SEF and SOE in consideration of mean half-widths.

Intraoperative transimpedance and spread of excitation profile correlations with a lateral-wall cochlear implant electrode array

A limiting factor of cochlear implant technology is the spread of electrode-generated intracochlear electrical field (EF) leading to spread of neural excitation (SOE). In this study, we investigated the relation of the spread of the intracochlear EF, assessed via transimpedance matrix (TIM), and SOE. A total of 43 consecutive patients (ages 0.7-82 years; 31.0 ± 25.7 years, mean ± SD) implanted with a Cochlear Nucleus CI522 or CI622 cochlear implant with Slim Straight electrode array (altogether 51 ears) were included in the study. Cochlear nerve was visualized for all patients in preoperative imaging and there were no cochlear anomalies in the study sample. The stimulated electrodes were in the basal, middle, and apical parts of the electrode array (electrode numbers 6, 11, and 19, respectively). The stimulation level was 210 CL on average for the TIM measurement and always 230 CL for the SOE measurement. Approximately 90% of the individual TIM and SOE profiles correlated with each other (p < .05; r = 0.61-0.99). Also, the widths of the TIM and SOE peaks, computed at 50% of the maximum height, exhibited a weak correlation (r = 0.39, p = .007). The 50% widths of TIM and SOE were the same only in the apical part of the electrode array; in the basal part SOE was wider than TIM, and in the middle part TIM was wider than SOE (p < .01 and p = .048, respectively). Within each measurement, TIM 50% widths were different between all three parts of the electrode array, while for SOE, only the basal electrode differed from the middle electrode. Finally, the size of the cochlea and the 50% widths of TIM and SOE had the strongest correlation in the middle part of the electrode array (r = -0.63, and -0.37, respectively). Our results suggest that there is a correlation between the spread of intracochlear EF and neural SOE at least in the apical part of the electrode array used in this study, and that larger cochleae are associated with more focused TIM and SOE.

Is the spread of excitation width correlated to the speech recognition in cochlear implant users?

PURPOSE

To assess whether there is an interference of the spread of excitation (SOE) on speech recognition.

METHODS

Retrospective cross-sectional study, approved by the institution's ethics committee (CAAE03409212.8.0000.0068). Adult patients with intraoperative neural response telemetry (NRT) performed on electrodes 6, 11 and 16 implanted with Cochlear Ltd (Sydney, Australia) devices were selected. Patients with partial array insertion, pre-lingual hearing loss, deafness etiology due to and CI experience less than 12 months were excluded. SOE was recorded at 10 current units above the NRT threshold (tNRT) and its width in millimeters was collected at point 0.75 of the function. Speech recognition test was 25-recorded monosyllables list, presented at 65 dBHL at 0° azimuth in a sound treated booth. The analysis was divided into groups by electrode array type, regarding the tNRT, SOE width, SOE's peak amplitude and electrode peak.

RESULTS

A 126 SOE measurements of the 3 tested electrodes were obtained from 43 patients. Patients with straight array had significantly wider SOE, greater peak amplitude at electrode 6 and higher tNRTs. In the perimodiolar array, there was a negative correlation between SOE and monosyllables recognition at electrodes 6 and 11, and in the combined average of the three electrodes, with a significant difference in electrode 11. Sixty-six percent of the SOE measurements had their peak shifted to adjacent electrodes.

CONCLUSION

It was observed, in perimodiolar array, the greater the dispersion of electrical current, the worse the speech recognition, especially in the medial electrode.