Abstract
Modern cochlear implants employ charge-balanced biphasic and triphasic pulses. However, the effectiveness of electrical pulse shape and polarity is still a matter of debate. For this purpose, in a previous study (Bahmer & Baumann, 2013) electrophysiological and psychophysical measurement after triphasic pulse stimulation with cathodic second phase was determined. Depending on the pulse shape configuration, the stimulation effectiveness differed similarly for electrophysiological and psychophysical measurements. However, the experiments were limited to stimulation pulses with cathodic second phase.
In this study, cathodic and anodic second phase stimulation was applied. Evoked compound action potentials (ECAPs) and psychophysical responses were recorded in eleven cochlear implant recipients (SYNCHRONY/SONATAti100/PULSARci100 devices, MED-EL Innsbruck). We compared the strength of the ECAP responses with individual psychophysical threshold levels depending on the pulse shape.
Results for pulses with cathodic second phase showed the weakest ECAP response and highest psychophysical thresholds for symmetric triphasic pulse shapes, and the strongest ECAP response and lowest psychophysical thresholds for biphasic pulses. The ECAP responses for anodic second phase differed from the results of triphasic stimulation with cathodic second phase. The U-shape of the ECAP response with increasing phase amplitude ratio (PAR) for cathodic second phase could not be observed for the anodic second phase. Instead, a flat curve was observed. In contrast, psychophysical threshold curves with increasing PAR were similar between cathodic and anodic second phase stimulation.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Bonn, Germany [BA 4237/3-1], supported this work.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The data was acquired under the authorization of the ethics committee of the University of Wuerzburg (file number 315/15_z). Address of the oversight body: Ethik-Kommission der Universitaet Wuerzburg Institut fuer Pharmakologie und Toxikologie Versbacher Str. 9 97078 Wuerzburg, Germany
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Abbreviations: AN = Auditory nerve; CI = Cochlear implant; ECAP = Evoked compound actions potential; PAR = Phase amplitude ratio; p-triphasic = Precision-triphasic pulse
Data Availability
All data can be made available by contacting the corresponding author. E-mail: herrmann_d{at}ukw.de.
