Hearing Loss, Complete Clinical Trial
— EBCSOfficial title:
Evaluation of a Bio-inspired Coding Strategy for Cochlear Implant Users
NCT number | NCT03726684 |
Other study ID # | EBCS |
Secondary ID | |
Status | Completed |
Phase | N/A |
First received | |
Last updated | |
Start date | July 2, 2018 |
Est. completion date | October 31, 2018 |
Verified date | November 2020 |
Source | University of Zurich |
Contact | n/a |
Is FDA regulated | No |
Health authority | |
Study type | Interventional |
This study will determine the facilitation, refractoriness and spatial spread effects of auditory nerve fiber responses to electrical stimulation via a cochlear implant. The performance of CI users in melody contour and speech recognition in noise tests with their own clinical sound processor and a MATLAB implementation of their coding strategy will be compared and a bioinspired coding strategy will be evaluated in comparison with the conventional ACE coding strategy.
Status | Completed |
Enrollment | 10 |
Est. completion date | October 31, 2018 |
Est. primary completion date | October 31, 2018 |
Accepts healthy volunteers | Accepts Healthy Volunteers |
Gender | All |
Age group | 18 Years to 80 Years |
Eligibility | Inclusion Criteria: - having Nucleus System 4, System 5, System 6 or System 7 sound processor - having 20 or more active electrodes - using one of these implant types: System 4, System 5, System 6, System 7 - using ACE coding strategy - speech recognition score of at least 70% on Oldenburg Speech Test (OLSA) in quiet - ability to perform an adaptive speech recognition test in noise - experience with their CI for at least six months - ability for speech understanding in the presence of competing noise without any assistance from lip-reading - ability to hear differences between musical notes at least for the easiest condition (3 semitones difference between successive notes in a pattern) - ability to provide subjective feedback in a certain listening situation - proficiency in reading and writing in German Exclusion Criteria: - Acute inflammation or pain in head-/neck area - Dizziness - Other known illness which would prevent regular participation in test sessions - Age of participants < 18 years - Age of participants > 80 years - Non-standard clinical sound processor program |
Country | Name | City | State |
---|---|---|---|
Switzerland | University Hospital Zurich, ENT Department | Zurich |
Lead Sponsor | Collaborator |
---|---|
University of Zurich |
Switzerland,
Abbas PJ, Hughes ML, Brown CJ, Miller CA, South H. Channel interaction in cochlear implant users evaluated using the electrically evoked compound action potential. Audiol Neurootol. 2004 Jul-Aug;9(4):203-13. — View Citation
Botros A, Psarros C. Neural response telemetry reconsidered: II. The influence of neural population on the ECAP recovery function and refractoriness. Ear Hear. 2010 Jun;31(3):380-91. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3181cb41aa. — View Citation
Boulet J, White M, Bruce IC. Temporal Considerations for Stimulating Spiral Ganglion Neurons with Cochlear Implants. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2016 Feb;17(1):1-17. Review. — View Citation
Bruce IC, Irlicht LS, White MW, O'Leary SJ, Dynes S, Javel E, Clark GM. A stochastic model of the electrically stimulated auditory nerve: pulse-train response. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1999 Jun;46(6):630-7. — View Citation
Cohen LT, Richardson LM, Saunders E, Cowan RS. Spatial spread of neural excitation in cochlear implant recipients: comparison of improved ECAP method and psychophysical forward masking. Hear Res. 2003 May;179(1-2):72-87. — View Citation
Cohen LT. Practical model description of peripheral neural excitation in cochlear implant recipients: 5. refractory recovery and facilitation. Hear Res. 2009 Feb;248(1-2):1-14. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2008.11.007. Epub 2008 Dec 7. — View Citation
Galvin JJ 3rd, Fu QJ, Nogaki G. Melodic contour identification by cochlear implant listeners. Ear Hear. 2007 Jun;28(3):302-19. — View Citation
Heffer LF, Sly DJ, Fallon JB, White MW, Shepherd RK, O'Leary SJ. Examining the auditory nerve fiber response to high rate cochlear implant stimulation: chronic sensorineural hearing loss and facilitation. J Neurophysiol. 2010 Dec;104(6):3124-35. doi: 10.1152/jn.00500.2010. Epub 2010 Oct 6. — View Citation
Hughes ML, Castioni EE, Goehring JL, Baudhuin JL. Temporal response properties of the auditory nerve: data from human cochlear-implant recipients. Hear Res. 2012 Mar;285(1-2):46-57. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2012.01.010. Epub 2012 Feb 8. — View Citation
Lai W, Dillier N. Neural adaptation and the ECAP response threshold: a pilot study. Cochlear Implants Int. 2009;10 Suppl 1:63-7. doi: 10.1179/cim.2009.10.Supplement-1.63. — View Citation
Miller CA, Abbas PJ, Brown CJ. An improved method of reducing stimulus artifact in the electrically evoked whole-nerve potential. Ear Hear. 2000 Aug;21(4):280-90. — View Citation
Miller CA, Abbas PJ, Robinson BK. Response properties of the refractory auditory nerve fiber. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2001 Sep;2(3):216-32. — View Citation
Miller CA, Hu N, Zhang F, Robinson BK, Abbas PJ. Changes across time in the temporal responses of auditory nerve fibers stimulated by electric pulse trains. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2008 Mar;9(1):122-37. doi: 10.1007/s10162-007-0108-5. Epub 2008 Jan 17. — View Citation
Morsnowski A, Charasse B, Collet L, Killian M, Müller-Deile J. Measuring the refractoriness of the electrically stimulated auditory nerve. Audiol Neurootol. 2006;11(6):389-402. Epub 2006 Sep 27. — View Citation
Negm MH, Bruce IC. The effects of HCN and KLT ion channels on adaptation and refractoriness in a stochastic auditory nerve model. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2014 Nov;61(11):2749-59. doi: 10.1109/TBME.2014.2327055. Epub 2014 May 29. — View Citation
Omran SA, Lai W, Dillier N. Pitch ranking, Melody contour and instrument recognition tests using two semitone frequency maps for Nucleus Cochlear Implants. EURASIP Journal on Audio, Speech, and Music Processing, 2011; 1-16.
Undurraga JA, Carlyon RP, Macherey O, Wouters J, van Wieringen A. Spread of excitation varies for different electrical pulse shapes and stimulation modes in cochlear implants. Hear Res. 2012 Aug;290(1-2):21-36. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2012.05.003. Epub 2012 May 11. — View Citation
Zeng FG, Rebscher S, Harrison W, Sun X, Feng H. Cochlear implants: system design, integration, and evaluation. IEEE Rev Biomed Eng. 2008;1:115-42. doi: 10.1109/RBME.2008.2008250. Epub 2008 Nov 5. Review. — View Citation
Zhang F, Miller CA, Robinson BK, Abbas PJ, Hu N. Changes across time in spike rate and spike amplitude of auditory nerve fibers stimulated by electric pulse trains. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2007 Sep;8(3):356-72. Epub 2007 Jun 12. — View Citation
* Note: There are 19 references in all — Click here to view all references
Type | Measure | Description | Time frame | Safety issue |
---|---|---|---|---|
Primary | Melody contour identification (MCI) test (% correct) | In the MCI test, five different melody contour patterns with three tones in each pattern are presented in a five alternative forced choice paradigm. The complex tones are synthesized to resemble a clarinet musical instrument. Three separations of fundamental tone frequency varying from one to three semitones are used to vary the difficulties for pattern identification. Every pattern is repeated 10 times in random order which amounts to a total of 150 melody contour presentations per condition. Overall percent correct results and percent correct results for each of the five patterns are determined for the reference and the intervention conditions. Tests are performed with the conventional ACE coding strategy (reference condition) and the bioinspired coding strategy whose parameters are determined from electrophysiological measures of sound-evoked neural responses (intervention condition). | 6 months | |
Secondary | Adaptive Oldenburg sentence test (OLSA) in noise (SRT in dB) | The Adaptive Oldenburg sentence test (OLSA) in noise is used to evaluate speech intelligibility in a noisy environment. The noise level is kept constant at 65 dB sound pressure Level (SPL, in dB) and the speech level is adjusted adaptively to determine the speech reception threshold (SRT, in dB, for 50% speech intelligibility in noise). Lower SRT values indicate better speech recognition in noise. Tests are performed with the conventional ACE coding strategy (reference condition) and the bioinspired coding strategy whose parameters are determined from electrophysiological measures of sound-evoked neural responses (intervention condition). | 6 months | |
Secondary | Time constants (usec) of recovery functions of electrically stimulated auditory nerve fibers, measured by electrically evoked compound action potential (ECAP) | Time constants of recovery functions of electrically stimulated auditory nerve fiber groups can be assessed by ECAP measures through the cochlear implant for various electrode positions. Series of two stimulation pulses are presented whereby the interval between the two pulses is increased from 100 usec to 10'000 usec. The nerve response amplitude grows with increasing interpulse delay from zero up to a saturation level. | 6 months | |
Secondary | Width of spread of excitation function (in mm) of electrically evoked compound action potential (ECAP) measures | Spread of excitation (SOE) is measured with a fixed probe and varying masker electrodes along the electrode array. The width of exponentially fitted SOE curves (in mm) is the main measurement parameter. Outcome variations depend on the amount and distribution of remaining auditory nerve fibers and the geometrical properties of the implanted electrode array relative to the anatomical situation of the patient's inner ear. | 6 months |