Level coding by phase duration and asymmetric pulse shape reduce channel interactions in cochlear implants.

Conventional loudness coding with CIs by pulse current amplitude has a disadvantage: Increasing the stimulation current increases the spread of excitation in the auditory nerve, resulting in stronger channel interactions at high stimulation levels. These limit the number of effective information channels that a CI user can perceive. Stimulus intensity information (loudness) can alternatively be transmitted via pulse phase duration. We hypothesized that loudness coding by phase duration avoids the increase in the spread of the electric field and thus leads to less channel interactions at high stimulation levels. To avoid polarity effects, we combined this coding with pseudomonophasic stimuli. To test whether this affects the spread of excitation, 16 acutely deafened guinea pigs were implanted with CIs and neural activity from the inferior colliculus was recorded while stimulating with either biphasic, amplitude-coded pulses, or pseudomonophasic, duration- or amplitude-coded pulses. Pseudomonophasic stimuli combined with phase duration loudness coding reduced the lowest response thresholds and the spread of excitation. We investigated the channel interactions at suprathreshold levels by computing the phase-locking to a pulse train in the presence of an interacting pulse train on a different electrode on the CI. Pseudomonophasic pulses coupled with phase duration loudness coding reduced the interference by 4-5% compared to biphasic pulses, depending on the place of stimulation. This effect of pseudomonophasic stimuli was achieved with amplitude coding only in the basal cochlea, indicating a distance- or volume dependent effect. Our results show that pseudomonophasic, phase-duration-coded stimuli slightly reduce channel interactions, suggesting a potential benefit for speech understanding in humans.

Electrical stimulation of the midbrain excites the auditory cortex asymmetrically.

BACKGROUND: Auditory midbrain implant users cannot achieve open speech perception and have limited frequency resolution. It remains unclear whether the spread of excitation contributes to this issue and how much it can be compensated by current-focusing, which is an effective approach in cochlear implants. OBJECTIVE: The present study examined the spread of excitation in the cortex elicited by electric midbrain stimulation. We further tested whether current-focusing via bipolar and tripolar stimulation is effective with electric midbrain stimulation and whether these modes hold any advantage over monopolar stimulation also in conditions when the stimulation electrodes are in direct contact with the target tissue. METHODS: Using penetrating multielectrode arrays, we recorded cortical population responses to single pulse electric midbrain stimulation in 10 ketamine/xylazine anesthetized mice. We compared monopolar, bipolar, and tripolar stimulation configurations with regard to the spread of excitation and the characteristic frequency difference between the stimulation/recording electrodes. RESULTS: The cortical responses were distributed asymmetrically around the characteristic frequency of the stimulated midbrain region with a strong activation in regions tuned up to one octave higher. We found no significant differences between monopolar, bipolar, and tripolar stimulation in threshold, evoked firing rate, or dynamic range. CONCLUSION: The cortical responses to electric midbrain stimulation are biased towards higher tonotopic frequencies. Current-focusing is not effective in direct contact electrical stimulation. Electrode maps should account for the asymmetrical spread of excitation when fitting auditory midbrain implants by shifting the frequency-bands downward and stimulating as dorsally as possible.