Cortical activation with sound stimulation in cochlear implant users demonstrated by positron emission tomography

Naito, Yasushi; Okazawa, Hidehiko; Honjo, Iwao; Hirano, Shigeru; Takahashi, Haruo; Shiomi, Yosaku; Hoji, Waka; Kawano, Michio; Ishizu, Koji; Yonekura, Yoshiharu

doi:10.1016/0926-6410(95)90009-8

Cited by 76 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As shown by the current study and previous studies by Ito et al (8) and Naito et al (9,10), similar auditory cortical areas are stimulated by speech and speechlike stimuli in postlingually deaf patients who have received a multichannel CI as in normal-hearing subjects.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 64%

Positron emission tomography in cochlear implant and auditory brainstem implant recipients

Miyamoto

Wong

2001

Journal of Communication Disorders

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 64%

Positron emission tomography in cochlear implant and auditory brainstem implant recipients

Miyamoto

Wong

2001

Journal of Communication Disorders

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Even though the role of right frontal areas in speech processing is still underinvestigated there is converging evidence which associates the right fronto-lateral cortex with the (re-)production of musical and lingual melodies. In detail, the opercular part of the right inferior frontal gyrus has been associated with silent reproduction of auditory presented sentences (Naito et al, 1995), analysis of harmonic sequences (Maess et al, 2001), and rhythmic shaping of speech production (Riecker, Wildgruber, Dogil, Grodd, & Ackermann, 2002). The caudally adjacent premotor cortex (Rolandic operculum) supports covert speech production and both covert and overt singing (Perry et al, 1999;Riecker, Ackermann, Wildgruber, Dogil, & Grodd, 2000;Wildgruber, Ackermann, Klose, Kardatzki, & Grodd, 1996).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Functional MR imaging exposes differential brain responses to syntax and prosody during auditory sentence comprehension

Meyer

Alter

Friederici

2003

Journal of Neurolinguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In two experiments using event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging we studied healthy adults who listened to sentences that either focused on lexical, syntactic, or prosodic information. In the first experiment two sentence conditions were employed: normal speech which contained function and content words, and pseudo speech which contained function and pseudo words. Sentence processing generally activated the superior temporal region (STR) bilaterally. Relative to normal sentences hearing pseudo sentences corresponded to stronger brain responses in the anterior STR (planum polare) and in the fronto-opercular region bilaterally. A second experiment was designed to test whether right hemisphere activation can be explained by processing prosodic aspects of speech, i.e. sentence intonation. In addition to normal and pseudo speech the second study examined degraded speech that neither contained morphosyntactic nor lexical information but only prosodic information, i.e. intonation, amplitude, duration, and spectral tilt. Statistical analyses based on regions of interest found differential activation patterns for frontal and temporal areas in the brain. Relative to sentences, degraded speech produced generally stronger activation in frontal regions. Furthermore, the data pointed to a particular involvement of right fronto-lateral regions in processing sentence melody. For the STR an inverse pattern was found: relative to degraded speech sentence conditions produced stronger activation in anterior, mid, and posterior parts of the left supratemporal plane, particular in the planum polare and planum temporale. In sum, the results show that the left planum polare and the left planum temporale mediate syntactic and semantic processing, whereas right fronto-lateral areas seem to be more sensitive to prosodic cues available in spoken language. q

show abstract

“…Cochlear implants also offer an interesting approach to neural plasticity associated with sensory reafferentation, deafness and speech comprehension recovery. Many conventional cochlear implant devices are not compatible with fMRI, so PET has often been used to investigate neural activations associated with electrical hearing [Herzog et al, 1991;Naito et al, 1995Naito et al, , 2000Nishimura et al, 2000;Okazawa et al, 1996;Truy et al, 1995;Wong et al, 1999].…”

Section: Cochlear Implantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Functional Imaging of the Auditory System: The Use of Positron Emission Tomography

Johnsrude¹,

Giraud²,

Frackowiak³

2002

Audiol Neurotol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Modern brain imaging methods now afford unprecedented opportunities for the in vivo study of central auditory system function. Positron emission tomography (PET) has been used as a functional imaging technique for more than 15 years to study the distribution of cerebral haemodynamic changes associated with auditory stimulation, in subjects with normal and abnormal auditory function. Many of these studies concern processes related to, but not identical with, audition, such as speech perception, melodic processing and directed attention. Additionally, PET has been used to explore auditory perception in clinical populations such as cochlear implantees, neurosurgical candidates and people with tinnitus and auditory hallucinations. The spatial resolution of PET does not appear sufficient to address questions of a fine anatomical grain, e.g. exploring functional specialization within the primary and secondary auditory cortex. Nevertheless, PET has considerable potential as a tool in basic research on, and clinical assessment of, many auditory phenomena. Although functional magnetic resonance imaging can now be used for many studies for which formerly only PET was suitable, PET still possesses unique advantages. For example, it permits acquisition of data from inferior frontal and anterior temporal areas, can be used with subjects with cochlear and other implants (such as pacemakers) and can be used to map neurochemical pathways and receptors.

show abstract

Cortical activation with sound stimulation in cochlear implant users demonstrated by positron emission tomography

Cited by 76 publications

References 15 publications

Positron emission tomography in cochlear implant and auditory brainstem implant recipients

Positron emission tomography in cochlear implant and auditory brainstem implant recipients

Functional MR imaging exposes differential brain responses to syntax and prosody during auditory sentence comprehension

Functional Imaging of the Auditory System: The Use of Positron Emission Tomography

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About