Potential benefits from deeply inserted cochlear implant electrodes.
OBJECTIVE
This review examines evidence for potential benefits of using cochlear implant electrodes that extend into the apical regions of the cochlea. Most cochlear implant systems use electrode arrays that extend 1 to 1.5 turns from the basal cochleostomy, but one manufacturer (MED-EL GmbH) uses an electrode array that is considerably longer. The fundamental rationale for using electrodes extending toward the apex of the cochlea is to provide additional low-pitched auditory percepts and thereby increase the spectral information available to the user. Several experimental long arrays have also been produced by other manufacturers to assess potential benefits of this approach.


METHODS
In addition to assessing the effects of deeply inserted electrodes on performance, this review examines several underlying and associated issues, including cochlear anatomy, electrode design, surgical considerations (including insertion trauma), and pitch scaling trials. Where possible, the aim is to draw conclusions regarding the potential from apical electrodes in general, rather than relating to the performance of specific and current devices.


RESULTS
Imaging studies indicate that currently available electrode arrays rarely extend more than two turns into the cochlea, the mean insertion angle for full insertions of the MED-EL electrodes being about 630°. This is considerably shorter than the total length of the cochlea and more closely approximates the length of the spiral ganglion. Anatomical considerations, and some modelling studies, suggest that fabrication of even longer electrodes is unlikely to provide additional spectral information. The issue of potential benefit from the most apical electrodes, therefore, is whether they are able to selectively stimulate discrete and tonotopically ordered neural populations near the apex of the spiral ganglion, where the ganglion cells are closely grouped. Pitch scaling studies, using the MED-EL and experimental long arrays, suggest that this is achieved in many cases, but that a significant number of individuals show evidence of pitch confusions or reversals among the most apical electrodes, presumably reducing potential performance benefit and presenting challenges for processor programming.


CONCLUSIONS
Benefits in terms of speech recognition and other performance measures are less clear. Several studies have indicated that deactivation of apical electrodes results in poorer speech recognition performance, but these have been mostly acute studies where the subjects have been accustomed to the full complement of electrodes, thus making interpretation difficult. Some chronic studies have suggested that apical electrodes do provide additional performance benefit, but others have shown performance improvement after deactivating some of the apical electrodes. Whether or not deeply inserted electrodes can offer performance benefits, there is evidence that currently available designs tend to produce more intracochlear trauma than shorter arrays, in terms of loss of residual acoustic hearing and reduction of the neural substrate. This may have important long-term consequences for the user. Furthermore, as it is possible that subjects with better low-frequency residual hearing are more likely to benefit from the inclusion of apical electrodes, there may be a potential clinical dilemma as the same subjects are those most likely to benefit from bimodal electroacoustic stimulation, requiring a relatively shallow insertion.
Audiology & Deafness Research Group, School of Psychological Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom. boyd.diag.audiol@btinternet.com
Paul J
PJ
Boyd
D019929:Cochlear Implantation / Q000379:methods*; D003054:Cochlear Implants; D003638:Deafness / Q000534:rehabilitation / Q000601:surgery*; D004567:Electrodes, Implanted; D006801:Humans