Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 23, 2025
Cochlear Implant Surgery and Electrically-evoked Auditory Brainstem Response Recordings in C57BL/6 Mice
Published on: January 9, 2019
Frequency Following Responses to Electric Cochlear Stimulation in an Animal Model
Matthew L Richardson1, Robert P Carlyon2, Harrison W Lin3
1Department of Otolaryngology, Center for Hearing Research, University of California at Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA. mlrichar@uci.edu.
Purpose:
Present-day cochlear-implant (CI) users can achieve high levels of speech reception in quiet surroundings. Nevertheless, sensitivity to the temporal pitch of sounds is limited, which contributes to deficits in speech reception amid multiple talkers and in appreciation of musical melodies. Short-term, invasive neurophysiological studies in animals have demonstrated limitations in neural phase locking in the tonotopic range of the auditory pathway that is activated by CIs. It remains an open question, however, whether those neural limitations can account for perceptual deficits in those animal species, let alone in human CI users. For that reason, we have evaluated non-invasive recordings of phase locking from cats chronically implanted with a CI.
Methods:
Ten deafened cats (eight female) were implanted with an animal version of a clinical CI array. The electrically evoked frequency following response (eFFRs) was recorded from the scalps of sedated animals at ≥ 10 weeks post-implantation. Stimuli consisted of constant-amplitude electrical pulse trains at rates from ~ 40 to 640 pulses per second.
Results:
Recordings of the eFFR demonstrated robust responses synchronized to electrical pulse trains across all stimulus rates. Analyses of eFFR amplitude and phase transfer functions confirmed that the eFFR, as with its normal-hearing counterpart, originates from multiple subcortical and cortical generators. The slopes of segments of eFFR phase transfer functions revealed stimulus-to-response latencies of generators that dominated the eFFR across restricted ranges of pulse rates. Those rate ranges must coincide with the limits of phase locking by putative generators at successive levels of the auditory neuroaxis and could inform our understanding of the limits to perceptual temporal acuity.
Conclusion:
The eFFR demonstrated here in an animal model provides a valuable non-invasive measure of temporal processing in electric cochlear stimulation that can be related to ongoing perceptual measures in the same animals and is well-suited to evaluate novel modes of auditory prosthesis for enhancing temporal acuity.
