A method for removing cochlear implant artifact

Friesen, Lendra; Picton, Terence W.

doi:10.1016/j.heares.2009.10.012

Cited by 52 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 67 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In order to confidently differentiate the actual cortical response from a possible stimulus artifact, we used several techniques as described in "Methods," including the technique of altering the inter-stimulus interval as proposed by Friesen and Picton (2010). Furthermore, we were able to replicate and reproduce all CAEP responses in all subjects on different stimulating electrodes.…”

Section: Methodological Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Altered Cortical Activity in Prelingually Deafened Cochlear Implant Users Following Long Periods of Auditory Deprivation

Lammers

Versnel

Zanten

et al. 2014

JARO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Auditory stimulation during childhood is critical for the development of the auditory cortex in humans and with that for hearing in adulthood. Age-related changes in morphology and peak latencies of the cortical auditory evoked potential (CAEP) have led to the use of this cortical response as a biomarker of auditory cortical maturation including studies of cortical development after deafness and subsequent cochlear implantation. To date, it is unknown whether prelingually deaf adults, with early onset deafness (before the age of 2 years) and who received a cochlear implant (CI) only during adulthood, would display absent or aberrant CAEP waveforms as predicted from CAEP studies in late implanted prelingually deaf children. In the current study, CAEP waveforms were recorded in response to electric stimuli in prelingually deaf adults, who received their CI after the age of 21 years. Waveform morphology and peak latencies were compared to the CAEP responses obtained in postlingually deaf adults, who became deaf after the age of 16. Unexpectedly, typical CAEP waveforms with adult-like P1-N1-P2 morphology could be recorded in the prelingually deaf adult CI users. On visual inspection, waveform morphology was comparable to the CAEP waveforms recorded in the postlingually deaf CI users. Interestingly, however, latencies of the N1 peak were significantly shorter and amplitudes were significantly larger in the prelingual group than in the postlingual group. The presence of the CAEP together with an early and large N1 peak might represent activation of the more innate and less complex components of the auditory cortex of the prelingually deaf CI user, whereas the CAEP in postlingually deaf CI users might reflect activation of the mature neural network still present in these patients. The CAEPs may therefore be helpful in the assessment of developmental state of the auditory cortex.

show abstract

Section: Methodological Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Altered Cortical Activity in Prelingually Deafened Cochlear Implant Users Following Long Periods of Auditory Deprivation

Lammers

Versnel

Zanten

et al. 2014

JARO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This effect can be minimized by restricting the duration of the electrical pulse/pulse train (e.g., (Gordon et al 2008) or by moving the reference electrode to other locations on the head (Gilley et al 2006). Another suggestion has been to eliminate the auditory response using a forward masking technique (as described above) and then subtract this measure, which contains the stimulus artefact alone, from the original response (Friesen and Picton 2010). If the response is recorded from multiple electrodes on the head, principal or independent component analyses can be used to isolate the artefact and remove it from the response (Gilley et al 2006;Gordon et al 2008).…”

Section: Recording Evoked Potential Responses In Children Using Cochlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use It or Lose It? Lessons Learned from the Developing Brains of Children Who are Deaf and Use Cochlear Implants to Hear

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the present paper, we review what is currently known about the effects of deafness on the developing human auditory system and ask: Without use, does the immature auditory system lose the ability to normally function and mature? Any change to the structure or function of the auditory pathways resulting from a lack of activity will have important implications for future use through an auditory prosthesis such as a cochlear implant. Data to date show that deafness in children arrests and disrupts normal auditory development. Multiple changes to the auditory pathways occur during the period of deafness with the extent and type of change being dependent upon the age and stage of auditory development at onset of deafness, the cause or type of deafness, and the length of time the immature auditory pathways are left without significant input. Structural changes to the auditory nerve, brainstem, and cortex have been described in animal models of deafness as well in humans who are deaf. Functional changes in deaf auditory pathways have been evaluated by using a cochlear implant to stimulate the auditory nerve with electrical pulses. Studies of electrically evoked activity in the immature deaf auditory system have demonstrated that auditory brainstem development is arrested and that thalamo-cortical areas are vulnerable to being taken over by other competitive inputs (cross-modal plasticity). Indeed, enhanced peripheral sight and detection of visual movement in congenitally deaf cats and adults have been linked to activity in specific areas of what would normally be auditory cortex. Cochlear implants can stimulate developmental plasticity in the auditory brainstem even after many years of deafness in childhood but changes in the auditory cortex are limited, at least in part, by the degree of reorganization which occurred during the period of deafness. Consequently, we must identify hearing loss rapidly (i.e., at birth for congenital deficits) and provide cochlear implants to appropriate candidates as soon as possible. Doing so has facilitated auditory development in the thalamo-cortex and allowed children who are deaf to perceive and use spoken language.

show abstract

“…A traditional approach to attenuate the CI artifact is the subtraction technique, where the presentation of the auditory stimuli is manipulated to create experimental conditions where the AEP response varies but the CI artifact remains constant (Friesen and Picton, 2010). Unfortunately this approach limits the type of experimental paradigms that can be used.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Semi-automatic attenuation of cochlear implant artifacts for the evaluation of late auditory evoked potentials

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A method for removing cochlear implant artifact

Cited by 52 publications

References 67 publications

Altered Cortical Activity in Prelingually Deafened Cochlear Implant Users Following Long Periods of Auditory Deprivation

Altered Cortical Activity in Prelingually Deafened Cochlear Implant Users Following Long Periods of Auditory Deprivation

Use It or Lose It? Lessons Learned from the Developing Brains of Children Who are Deaf and Use Cochlear Implants to Hear

Semi-automatic attenuation of cochlear implant artifacts for the evaluation of late auditory evoked potentials

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About