Mismatch Negativity Brain Response as an Index of Speech Perception Recovery in Cochlear-Implant Recipients

This paper describes a logatome discrimination test for the assessment of speech perception in cochlear implant users (CI users), based on a multilingual speech database, the Oldenburg Logatome Corpus, which was originally recorded for the comparison of human and automated speech recognition. The logatome discrimination task is based on the presentation of 100 logatome pairs (i.e., nonsense syllables) with balanced representations of alternating “vowel-replacement” and “consonant-replacement” paradigms in order to assess phoneme confusions. Thirteen adult normal hearing listeners and eight adult CI users, including both good and poor performers, were included in the study and completed the test after their speech intelligibility abilities were evaluated with an established sentence test in noise. Furthermore, the discrimination abilities were measured electrophysiologically by recording the mismatch negativity (MMN) as a component of auditory event-related potentials. The results show a clear MMN response only for normal hearing listeners and CI users with good performance, correlating with their logatome discrimination abilities. Higher discrimination scores for vowel-replacement paradigms than for the consonant-replacement paradigms were found. We conclude that the logatome discrimination test is well suited to monitor the speech perception skills of CI users. Due to the large number of available spoken logatome items, the Oldenburg Logatome Corpus appears to provide a useful and powerful basis for further development of speech perception tests for CI users.

Download Full-text

Mismatch Negativity in Children with Cochlear Implant

International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology ◽

10.1055/s-0039-1688967 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 23 (03) ◽

pp. e292-e298

Author(s):

Natalia Martinez Fernandes ◽

Daniela Gil ◽

Marisa Frasson de Azevedo

Keyword(s):

Speech Perception ◽

Language Development ◽

Cochlear Implant ◽

Cochlear Implants ◽

Family Involvement ◽

Mismatch Negativity ◽

Control Group ◽

Study Group ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Hearing Children

Introduction The mismatch negativity (MMN) is a negative long-latency auditory potential elicited by any discriminable change in a repetitive aspect of auditory stimulation. This evoked potential can provide cortical information about the sound processing, including in children who use cochlear implants. Objective To identify MMN characteristics regarding latency, amplitude, and wave area in cochlear implanted children and to identify associations among language development, speech perception and family involvement. Methods This is a descriptive, observational, cross-sectional study, which compared two groups: study group—children with cochlear implant, and control group—hearing children. The children were submitted to MMN evaluation with non-verbal tone burst stimulus, differing in frequency in sound field at 70 dBHL, with SmartEP equipment (Intelligent Hearing Systems, Miami, FL, USA). Speech perception and language development questionnaires were also applied, and the family participation in the rehabilitation process was classified. Results The occurrence of MMN was 73.3% for the control group and 53.3% for the study group. Values of latency, amplitude and area of MMN of children using cochlear implants were similar to those of hearing children, and did not differ between groups. The occurrence of MMN was not correlated to the variables of hearing, language and family categories. Conclusion Children with cochlear implants showed similar MMN responses to those of the children in the control group, with mean latency, amplitude and area of 208.9 ms (±12.8), -2.37 μV (±0.38) and 86.5 μVms (±23.4), respectively. There was no correlation between the presence of MMN and children's performance in the auditory and language development tests or family involvement during rehabilitation.

Download Full-text

The mismatch negativity (MMN) brain response to sound frequency changes in adult cochlear implant recipients: a follow-up study

Acta Oto-Laryngologica ◽

10.3109/00016489.2013.780293 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 133 (8) ◽

pp. 853-857 ◽

Cited By ~ 14

Author(s):

Eila Lonka ◽

Kristiina Relander-Syrjänen ◽

Reijo Johansson ◽

Risto Näätänen ◽

Kimmo Alho ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Cochlear Implant ◽

Mismatch Negativity ◽

Sound Frequency ◽

Brain Response ◽

Follow Up Study ◽

Frequency Changes

Download Full-text

Meta-Analysis—Correlation between Spiral Ganglion Cell Counts and Speech Perception with a Cochlear Implant

Audiology Research ◽

10.3390/audiolres11020020 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (2) ◽

pp. 220-226

Author(s):

Yew-Song Cheng ◽

Mario A. Svirsky

Keyword(s):

Speech Perception ◽

Cochlear Implant ◽

Ganglion Cells ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Spiral Ganglion ◽

Spiral Ganglion Cell ◽

Cell Counts ◽

Temporal Bones ◽

The Relationship ◽

Existing Data

The presence of spiral ganglion cells (SGCs) is widely accepted to be a prerequisite for successful speech perception with a cochlear implant (CI), because SGCs provide the only known conduit between the implant electrode and the central auditory system. By extension, it has been hypothesized that the number of SGCs might be an important factor in CI outcomes. An impressive body of work has been published on findings from the laborious process of collecting temporal bones from CI users and counting the number of SGCs to correlate those numbers with speech perception scores, but the findings thus far have been conflicting. We performed a meta-analysis of all published studies with the hope that combining existing data may help us reach a more definitive conclusion about the relationship between SGC count and speech perception scores in adults.

Download Full-text

Psychophysical and speech perception studies: A case report on a binaural cochlear implant subject

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America ◽

10.1121/1.407223 ◽

1993 ◽

Vol 94 (6) ◽

pp. 3178-3189 ◽

Cited By ~ 50

Author(s):

R. J. M. van Hoesel ◽

Y. C. Tong ◽

R. D. Hollow ◽

G. M. Clark

Keyword(s):

Case Report ◽

Speech Perception ◽

Cochlear Implant

Download Full-text

Reduction in High-Frequency Hearing Aid Gain Can Improve Performance in Patients With Contralateral Cochlear Implant: A Pilot Study

American Journal of Audiology ◽

10.1044/2015_aja-15-0045 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 24 (4) ◽

pp. 462-468 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Jessica J. Messersmith ◽

Lindsey E. Jorgensen ◽

Jessica A. Hagg

Keyword(s):

Speech Perception ◽

Cochlear Implant ◽

Chart Review ◽

Hearing Aid ◽

Retrospective Chart Review ◽

Improve Performance ◽

Bimodal Condition ◽

Overall Performance ◽

Age Range ◽

Clinic Population

Purpose The purpose of this study was to determine whether an alternate fitting strategy, specifically adjustment to gains in a hearing aid (HA), would improve performance in patients who experienced poorer performance in the bimodal condition when the HA was fit to traditional targets. Method This study was a retrospective chart review from a local clinic population seen during a 6-month period. Participants included 6 users of bimodal stimulation. Two performed poorer in the cochlear implant (CI) + HA condition than in the CI-only condition. One individual performed higher in the bimodal condition, but the overall performance was low. Three age range–matched users whose performance increased when the HA was used in conjunction with a CI were also included. The HA gain was reduced beyond 2000 Hz. Speech perception scores were obtained pre- and postmodification to the HA fitting. Results All listeners whose HA was programmed using the modified approach demonstrated improved speech perception scores with the modified HA fit in the bimodal condition when compared with the traditional HA fit in the bimodal condition. Conclusion Modifications to gains above 2000 Hz in the HA may improve performance for bimodal listeners who perform more poorly in the bimodal condition when the HA is fit to traditional targets.

Download Full-text

Cochlear implant codes and speech perception in the profoundly deaf

Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society ◽

10.3758/bf03333592 ◽

1981 ◽

Vol 18 (3) ◽

pp. 161-164 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Gerald S. Wasserman

Keyword(s):

Speech Perception ◽

Cochlear Implant

Download Full-text

Bone-anchored hearing system, contralateral routing of signals hearing aid or cochlear implant: what is best in single-sided deafness?

European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology ◽

10.1007/s00405-021-06634-7 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Till F. Jakob ◽

Iva Speck ◽

Ann-Kathrin Rauch ◽

Frederike Hassepass ◽

Manuel C. Ketterer ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Speech Perception ◽

Cochlear Implant ◽

Hearing Aids ◽

Long Term Results ◽

Speech Perception In Noise ◽

Sound Localisation ◽

Therapy Option ◽

Single Sided Deafness ◽

Objective Hearing Tests

Abstract Purpose The aim of the study was to compare long-term results after 1 year in patients with single-sided deafness (SSD) who were fitted with different hearing aids. The participants tested contralateral routing of signals (CROS) hearing aids and bone-anchored hearing systems (BAHS). They were also informed about the possibility of a cochlear implant (CI) and chose one of the three devices. We also investigated which factors influenced the choice of device. Methods Prospective study with 89 SSD participants who were divided into three groups by choosing BAHS, CROS, or CI. All participants received test batteries with both objective hearing tests (speech perception in noise and sound localisation) and subjective questionnaires. Results 16 participants opted for BAHS-, 13 for CROS- and 30 for CI-treatment. The greater the subjective impairment caused by SSD, the more likely patients were to opt for surgical treatment (BAHS or CI). The best results in terms of speech perception in noise (especially when sound reaches the deaf ear and noise the hearing ear), sound localization, and subjective results were achieved with CI. Conclusion The best results regarding the therapy of SSD are achieved with a CI, followed by BAHS. This was evident both in objective tests and in the subjective questionnaires. Nevertheless, an individual decision is required in each case as to which SSD therapy option is best for the patient. Above all, the patient's subjective impairment and expectations should be included in the decision-making process.

Download Full-text