Using Stapes Velocity to Estimate the Efficacy of Mechanical Stimulation of the Round Window With an Active Middle Ear Implant.
Journal
Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology
ISSN: 1537-4505
Titre abrégé: Otol Neurotol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 100961504
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 06 2023
01 06 2023
Historique:
pmc-release:
01
06
2024
medline:
15
5
2023
pubmed:
25
3
2023
entrez:
24
3
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To test a method to measure the efficacy of active middle ear implants when coupled to the round window. Data previously published in Koka et al. ( Hear Res 2010;263:128-137) were used in this study. Simultaneous measurements of cochlear microphonics (CM) and stapes velocity in response to both acoustic stimulation (forward direction) and round window (RW) stimulation (reverse direction) with an active middle ear implant (AMEI) were made in seven ears in five chinchillas. For each stimulus frequency, the amplitude of the CM was measured separately as a function of intensity (dB SPL or dB mV). Equivalent vibrational input to the cochlea was determined by equating the acoustic and AMEI-generated CM amplitudes for a given intensity. In the condition of equivalent CM amplitude between acoustic and RW stimulation-generated output, we assume that the same vibrational input to the cochlea was present regardless of the route of stimulation. The measured stapes velocities for equivalent CM output from the two types of input were not significantly different for low and medium frequencies (0.25-4 kHz); however, the velocities for AMEI-RW drive were significantly lower for higher frequencies (4-14 kHz). Thus, for RM stimulation with an AMEI, stapes velocities can underestimate the mechanical input to the cochlea by ~20 dB for frequencies greater than ~4 kHz. This study confirms that stapes velocity (with the assumption of equivalent stapes velocity for forward and reverse stimulation) cannot be used as a proxy for effective input to the cochlea when it is stimulated in the reverse direction. Future research on application of intraoperative electrophysiological measurements during surgery (CM, compound action potential, or auditory brainstem response) for estimating efficacy and optimizing device coupling and performance is warranted.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36962010
doi: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000003859
pii: 00129492-202306000-00018
pmc: PMC10175173
mid: NIHMS1874359
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e311-e318Subventions
Organisme : NINDS NIH HHS
ID : P30 NS048154
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023, Otology & Neurotology, Inc.
Références
Jenkins HA, Atkins JS, Horlbeck D, et al. Otologics fully implantable hearing system: Phase I trial 1-year results. Otol Neurotol 2008;29:534–41.
Fisch U, Cremers CW, Lenarz T, et al. Clinical experience with the Vibrant Soundbridge implant device. Otol Neurotol 2001;22:962–72.
Verhaegen VJO, Mulder JJS, Noten JFP, et al. Intraoperative auditory steady state response measurements during Vibrant Soundbridge middle ear implantation in patients with mixed hearing loss: Preliminary results. Otol Neurotol 2010;31:1365–8.
Jenkins HA, Greene N, Tollin DJ. Round window stimulation of the cochlea. Front Neurol 2021;12:777010.
Jenkins HA, Niparko JK, Slattery WH, Neely JG, Fredrickson JM. Otologics middle ear transducer ossicular stimulator: Performance results with varying degrees of sensorineural hearing loss. Acta Otolaryngol 2004;124:391–4.
Sterkers O, Boucarra D, Labassi S, et al. A middle ear implant, the symphonix Vibrant Soundbridge: Retrospective study of the first 125 patients implanted in France. Otol Neurotol 2003;24:427–36.
Frenzel H, Hanke F, Beltrame M, et al. Application of the Vibrant Soundbridge ® to unilateral osseous atresia cases. Laryngoscope 2009;119:67–74.
Iwasaki S, Usami SI, Takahashi H, et al. Round window application of an active middle ear implant: A comparison with hearing aid usage in Japan. Otol Neurotol 2017;38:e145–51.
Tringali S, Pergola N, Ferber-Viart C, et al. Fully implantable hearing device as a new treatment of conductive hearing loss in Franceschetti syndrome. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2008;72:513–7.
Colletti V, Soli SD, Carner M, Colletti L. Treatment of mixed hearing losses via implantation of a vibratory transducer on the round window. Int J Audiol 2006;45:600–8.
Beltrame AM, Martini A, Prosser S, Giarbini N, Streitberger C. Coupling the Vibrant Soundbridge to cochlea round window: Auditory results in patients with mixed hearing loss. Otol Neurotol 2009;30:194–201.
Linder T, Schlegel C, DeMin N, van der Westhuizen S. Active middle ear implants in patients undergoing subtotal petrosectomy: New application for the Vibrant Soundbridge device and its implication for lateral cranium base surgery. Otol Neurotol 2008;30:41–7.
Venail F, Lavieille JP, Meller R, et al. New perspectives for middle ear implants: First results in otosclerosis with mixed hearing loss. Laryngoscope 2007;117:552–5.
Lefebvre PP, Martin C, Dubreuil C, et al. A pilot study of the safety and performance of the otologics fully implantable hearing device: Transducing sounds via the round window membrane to the inner ear. Audiol Neurotol . 2009;14:172–80.
Siegert R, Mattheis S, Kasic J. Fully implantable hearing aids in patients with congenital auricular atresia. Laryngoscope 2007;117:336–40.
Dumon T, Zennaro O, Aran JM, Bébéar JP. Piezoelectric middle ear implant preserving the ossicular chain. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 1995;28:173–87.
Wever EG, Lawrence M, Smith KR. The middle ear in sound conduction. Arch Otolaryngol 1949;48:19–35.
Wever EG, Lawrence M. The acoustic pathways to the cochlea. J Acoust Soc Am 1950;22:460–7.
Voss SE, Rosowski JJ, Peake WT. Is the pressure difference between the oval and round windows the effective acoustic stimulus for the cochlea? J Acoust Soc Am 1996;100:1602–16.
Kiefer J, Arnold W, Staudenmaier R. Round window stimulation with an implantable hearing aid (Soundbridge®) combined with autogenous reconstruction of the auricle—A new approach. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec 2006;68:378–85.
Wollenberg B, Beltrame M, Schönweiler R, et al. Integration of the active middle ear implant Vibrant Soundbridge in total auricular reconstruction. HNO 2007;55:349–56.
Spiegel JL, Kutsch L, Jakob M, et al. Long-term stability and functional outcome of an active middle ear implant regarding different coupling sites. Otol Neurotol 2020;41:60–7.
Lupo JE, Koka K, Holland NJ, Jenkins HA, Tollin DJ. Prospective electrophysiologic findings of round window stimulation in a model of experimentally induced stapes fixation. Otol Neurotol 2009;30:1215–24.
Spindel J, Lambert P, Ruth RA. The Round Window Electromagnetic Implantable Hearing Aid Approach. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 1995;28:189–205.
Zennaro O, Dumon T, Erre JP, Guillaume A, Aran JM. Piezo-electric middle ear implant hearing aid experimental model in guinea-pig. Proc Ann Int Conf IEEE 1992;4:1316–1317.
Schraven SP, Hirt B, Gummer AW, Zenner HP, Dalhoff E. Controlled round-window stimulation in human temporal bones yielding reproducible and functionally relevant stapedial responses. Hear Res 2011;282(1–2):272–82.
Xue L, Liu H, Yang J, et al. Research on coupling effects of actuator and round window membrane on reverse stimulation of human cochlea. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 2021;235:447–58.
Schraven SP, Hirt B, Goll E, et al. Conditions for highly efficient and reproducible round-window stimulation in humans. Audiol Neurootol 2012;17:133–8.
Stieger C, Rosowski JJ, Nakajima HH. Comparison of forward (ear-canal) and reverse (round-window) sound stimulation of the cochlea. Hear Res 2013;301:105–14.
Lupo JE, Koka K, Jenkins HA, Tollin DJ. Vibromechanical assessment of active middle ear implant stimulation in simulated middle ear effusion: A temporal bone study. Otol Neurotol 2014;35:470–5.
Koka K, Holland NJ, Lupo JE, Jenkins HA, Tollin DJ. Electrocochleographic and mechanical assessment of round window stimulation with an active middle ear prosthesis. Hear Res 2010;263:128–37.
Nakajima HH, Dong W, Olson ES, et al. Evaluation of round window stimulation using the floating mass transducer by intracochlear sound pressure measurements in human temporal bones. Otol Neurotol 2010;31:506–11.
Nakajima HH, Merchant SN, Rosowski JJ. Performance considerations of prosthetic actuators for round-window stimulation. Hear Res 2010;263(1–2):114–9.
Tringali S, Koka K, Deveze A, et al. Round window membrane implantation with an active middle ear implant: A study of the effects on the performance of round window exposure and transducer tip diameter in human cadaveric temporal bones. Audiol Neurotol 2010;15:291–302.
Eric Lupo J, Koka K, Thornton JL, Tollin DJ. The effects of experimentally induced conductive hearing loss on spectral and temporal aspects of sound transmission through the ear. Hear Res 2011;272(1–2):30–41.
Grossöhmichen M, Salcher R, Kreipe HH, Lenarz T, Maier H. The Codacs™ direct acoustic cochlear implant actuator: Exploring alternative stimulation sites and their stimulation efficiency. PLoS One 2015;10:e0119601.
Rosowski JJ, Chiena W, Ravicz ME, Merchant SN. Testing a method for quantifying the output of implantable middle ear hearing devices. Audiol Neurotol . 2007;12:265–76.
ASTM. Standard Practice for Describing System Output of Implantable Middle Ear Hearing Devices: F2504-05(2014) . Philadelphia, PA: ASTM; 2014.
Lee JW, Seong KW, Lee SH, Lee KY, Cho JH. Comparison of auditory responses determined by acoustic stimulation and by mechanical round window stimulation at equivalent stapes velocities. Hear Res 2014;314:65–71.
Lupo JE, Koka K, Hyde BJ, Jenkins HA, Tollin DJ. Physiological assessment of active middle ear implant coupling to the round window in Chinchilla lanigera . Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2011;145:641–7.
Dallos P. The Auditory Periphery: Biophysics and Physiology . New York, NY: Academic Press; 1973.
Thornton JL, Chevallier KM, Koka K, Lupo JE, Tollin DJ. The conductive hearing loss due to an experimentally induced middle ear effusion alters the interaural level and time difference cues to sound location. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2012;13:641–54.
Arkritas MG. The rank transform method in some two-factor designs. J Am Stat Assoc 1990;85:73–8.
Kringlebotn M. The equality of volume displacements in the inner ear windows. J Acoust Soc Am 1995;98:192–6.
Stenfelt S, Hato N, Goode RL. Fluid volume displacement at the oval and round windows with air and bone conduction stimulation. J Acoust Soc Am 2004;115:797–812.
Sim JH, Chatzimichalis M, Röösli C, Laske RD, Huber AM. Objective assessment of stapedotomy surgery from round window motion measurement. Ear Hear 2012;33:e24–31.
Puria S. Measurements of human middle ear forward and reverse acoustics: Implications for otoacoustic emissions. J Acoust Soc Am 2003;113:2773–89.
Beutelmann R, Laumen G, Tollin D, Klump GM. Amplitude and phase equalization of stimuli for click evoked auditory brainstem responses. J Acoust Soc Am 2014;137:EL71–7.
Xue L, Liu H, Wang W, et al. The role of third windows on human sound transmission of forward and reverse stimulations: A lumped-parameter approach. J Acoust Soc Am 2020;147:1478.
Grossöhmichen M, Waldmann B, Salcher R, et al. Validation of methods for prediction of clinical output levels of active middle ear implants from measurements in human cadaveric ears. Sci Rep 2017;7:15877.
Radeloff A, Shehata-Dieler W, Rak K, et al. Intraoperative monitoring of active middle ear implant function in patients with normal and pathologic middle ears. Otol Neurotol 2011;32:104–7.