Abstract
Cochlear implants (CI) directly stimulate the auditory
nerve (AN), bypassing the mechano-electrical transduction in the inner ear. Trains of biphasic, charge balanced pulses (anodic and cathodic) are used as
stimuli to avoid damage of the tissue.
The pulses of
either polarity are capable of producing action
potentials (AP) whereby the sites of initiation of
the AP differ for the two polarities
. A cathodic
pulse triggers an AP in the peripheral axon, whereas
an anodic pulse triggers an AP in the central axon.
The
latency difference between the APs initiated at
the different sites is about 200μs, which is large
enough to affect the temporal coding of sounds and
hence, potentially, the communication abilities of the
CI listener. In the present study,
two recently proposed models of electric stimulation of the AN
[1,2] were considered in terms of their efficacy
to predict the spike timing for anodic and cathodic stimulation of the AN of cat [3]. The models’ responses to the electrical pulses of various
shapes [4,5,6] were also analyzed.
It was found
that, while the models can account for the firing rates
in response to various biphasic pulse shapes,
they fail
to correctly describe the timing of AP in response
to monophasic pulses.
Strategies for improving the
model performance with respect to correct AP timing
are discussed.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Publication date | 2014 |
Publication status | Published - 2014 |
Event | 7th Forum Acusticum - Krakow, Poland Duration: 7 Sept 2014 → 12 Sept 2014 |
Conference
Conference | 7th Forum Acusticum |
---|---|
Country/Territory | Poland |
City | Krakow |
Period | 07/09/2014 → 12/09/2014 |