Processing of voices in deafness rehabilitation by auditory brainstem implant

Coëz, Arnaud; Zilbovicius, Mônica; Ferrary, Évelyne; Bouccara, D.; Mosnier, Isabelle; Ambert-Dahan, Emmanuèle; Kalamaridès, Michel; Bizaguet, Eric; Syrota, A.; Samson, Yves; Sterkers, Olivier

doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.05.053

Cited by 17 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The global differences in rCBF were covaried out in these comparisons (the equation used is presented in the Supplementary Data). This design has been used in previous studies to compare brain states between healthy subject and patient groups (Malaspina et al, 2004;Mazza et al, 2006;Coez et al, 2009;Silva et al, 2010). The correction for multiple nonindependence of voxels was performed on the whole brain (FWE, p ¼ 0.05), and an extent threshold of k410 was applied.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resting Brain Activity Varies with Dream Recall Frequency Between Subjects

Eichenlaub

Nicolas

Daltrozzo

et al. 2014

Neuropsychopharmacol

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dreaming is still poorly understood. Notably, its cerebral underpinning remains unclear. Neuropsychological studies have shown that lesions in the temporoparietal junction (TPJ) and/or the white matter of the medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC) lead to the global cessation of dream reports, suggesting that these regions of the default mode network have key roles in the dreaming process (forebrain 'dream-on' hypothesis). To test this hypothesis, we measured regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF) using [(15)O]H2O positron emission tomography in healthy subjects with high and low dream recall frequencies (DRFs) during wakefulness (rest) and sleep (rapid eye movement (REM) sleep, N2, and N3). Compared with Low recallers (0.5 ± 0.3 dream recall per week in average), High recallers (5.2 ± 1.4) showed higher rCBF in the TPJ during REM sleep, N3, and wakefulness, and in the MPFC during REM sleep and wakefulness. We demonstrate that the resting states of High recallers and Low recallers differ during sleep and wakefulness. It coheres with previous ERP results and confirms that a high/low DRF is associated with a specific functional organization of the brain. These results support the forebrain 'dream-on' hypothesis and suggest that TPJ and MPFC are not only involved in dream recall during wakefulness but also have a role in dreaming during sleep (production and/or encoding). Increased activity in the TPJ and MPFC might promote the mental imagery and/or memory encoding of dreams. Notably, increased activity in TPJ might facilitate attention orienting toward external stimuli and promote intrasleep wakefulness, facilitating the encoding of the dreams in memory.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resting Brain Activity Varies with Dream Recall Frequency Between Subjects

Eichenlaub

Nicolas

Daltrozzo

et al. 2014

Neuropsychopharmacol

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Efforts to understand and improve speech perception in patients with central auditory implants are of utmost importance. To better understand the special requirements for electrical stimulation, previous radiotracer imaging studies exploring the cortical response patterns in CI, ABI, and AMI patients could show bilateral recruitment of the auditory cortex to speech and non‐speech sounds in all groups of patients [Berding et al, ; Coez et al, ; Miyamoto et al, ; Miyamoto and Wong, ; Di Nardo et al, ]. First studies have proven the feasibility of recordings of electrically evoked auditory brainstem, mid‐latency and cortical auditory responses in ABI [He et al, ; Herrmann et al, ; O'Driscoll et al, ] and AMI patients [Colletti et al, ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Auditory and audio–visual processing in patients with cochlear, auditory brainstem, and auditory midbrain implants: An EEG study

Schierholz

Finke

Kral

et al. 2017

Human Brain Mapping

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is substantial variability in speech recognition ability across patients with cochlear implants (CIs), auditory brainstem implants (ABIs), and auditory midbrain implants (AMIs). To better understand how this variability is related to central processing differences, the current electroencephalography (EEG) study compared hearing abilities and auditory-cortex activation in patients with electrical stimulation at different sites of the auditory pathway. Three different groups of patients with auditory implants (Hannover Medical School; ABI: n = 6, CI: n = 6; AMI: n = 2) performed a speeded response task and a speech recognition test with auditory, visual, and audio-visual stimuli. Behavioral performance and cortical processing of auditory and audio-visual stimuli were compared between groups. ABI and AMI patients showed prolonged response times on auditory and audio-visual stimuli compared with NH listeners and CI patients. This was confirmed by prolonged N1 latencies and reduced N1 amplitudes in ABI and AMI patients. However, patients with central auditory implants showed a remarkable gain in performance when visual and auditory input was combined, in both speech and non-speech conditions, which was reflected by a strong visual modulation of auditory-cortex activation in these individuals. In sum, the results suggest that the behavioral improvement for audio-visual conditions in central auditory implant patients is based on enhanced audio-visual interactions in the auditory cortex. Their findings may provide important implications for the optimization of electrical stimulation and rehabilitation strategies in patients with central auditory prostheses. Hum Brain Mapp 38:2206-2225, 2017. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

show abstract

“…Brain imaging studies point to a network of areas along the superior temporal sulcus and gyrus (STS and STG) that are specifically sensitive to human voice stimuli (Belin, Zatorre, Lafaille, Ahad, & Pike, 2000;Kriegstein & Giraud, 2004;Pernet et al, 2015); This set of areas is referred to as temporal voice areas (TVAs) (Belin, Zatorre, & Ahad, 2002) and can be subdivided in various regions with distinct implications in human vocal sounds processing (Pernet et al, 2015) . In adult CI patients, TVAs are shown to be poorly activated by voice stimuli (Coez et al, 2008), a result that questions their functional integrity after a prolonged period of auditory deprivation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While none of these studies provide evidence for a causal relationship between the cross-modal (visual) recruitment of temporal regions and deficient auditory processing in CI patients, these observations have been interpreted as a maladaptive impact of crossmodal reorganisation (discussed in (Heimler, Weisz, & Collignon, 2014)). Based on these interpretations, our hypothesis is that the TVAs have lost part of their functional integrity in CI patients (Coez et al, 2008), a phenomena that could be responsible to some extent for the deficit of CI patients in processing human voices and their attributes. While the crossmodal reorganization tends to decrease in the auditory temporal regions with the patients recovery of auditory speech comprehension (Chen, Sandmann, Thorne, Bleichner, & Debener, 2016;Doucet, Bergeron, Lassonde, Ferron, & Lepore, 2006;Rouger et al, 2012), we have no cues on how face-voice interactions are affected in CI patients.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Crossmodal interactions during non-linguistic auditory processing in cochlear-implanted deaf patients

Barone

Chambaudie

Strelnikov

et al. 2016

Cortex

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Due to signal distortion, speech comprehension in cochlear-implanted (CI) patients relies strongly on visual information, a compensatory strategy supported by important cortical crossmodal reorganisations. Though crossmodal interactions are evident for speech processing, it is unclear whether a visual influence is observed in CI patients during non-linguistic visual-auditory processing, such as face-voice interactions, which are important in social communication. We analyse and compare visual-auditory interactions in CI patients and normal-hearing subjects (NHS) at equivalent auditory performance levels. Proficient CI patients and NHS performed a voice-gender categorisation in the visual-auditory modality from a morphing-generated voice continuum between male and female speakers, while ignoring the presentation of a male or female visual face. Our data show that during the face-voice interaction, CI deaf patients are strongly influenced by visual information when performing an auditory gender categorisation task, in spite of maximum recovery of auditory speech. No such effect is observed in NHS, even in situations of CI simulation. Our hypothesis is that the functional crossmodal reorganisation that occurs in deafness could influence nonverbal processing, such as face-voice interaction; this is important for patient internal supramodal representation.

show abstract

Processing of voices in deafness rehabilitation by auditory brainstem implant

Cited by 17 publications

References 31 publications

Resting Brain Activity Varies with Dream Recall Frequency Between Subjects

Resting Brain Activity Varies with Dream Recall Frequency Between Subjects

Auditory and audio–visual processing in patients with cochlear, auditory brainstem, and auditory midbrain implants: An EEG study

Crossmodal interactions during non-linguistic auditory processing in cochlear-implanted deaf patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About