Medical Engineering & Physics
Volume 30, Issue 2 , Pages 171-181 , March 2008

Physiologically inspired signal preprocessing for auditory prostheses: Insights from the electro-motility of the OHC

  • Antanas Stasiunas

      Affiliations

    • Department of Applied Electronics, Kaunas University of Technology, LT-51368 Kaunas, Lithuania
    • ,
  • Antanas Verikas

      Affiliations

    • Department of Applied Electronics, Kaunas University of Technology, LT-51368 Kaunas, Lithuania
    • Intelligent Systems Laboratory, Halmstad University, Box 823, S-30118 Halmstad, Sweden
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author at: Intelligent Systems Laboratory, Halmstad University, Box 823, S-30118 Halmstad, Sweden. Tel.: +46 35 167 140; fax: +46 35 216 724.
    • ,
  • Rimvydas Miliauskas

      Affiliations

    • Department of Physiology, Kaunas University of Medicine, LT-44307 Kaunas, Lithuania
    • ,
  • Natalija Stasiuniene

      Affiliations

    • Department of Biochemistry, Kaunas University of Medicine, LT-44307 Kaunas, Lithuania
    • ,
  • Marija Bacauskiene

      Affiliations

    • Department of Applied Electronics, Kaunas University of Technology, LT-51368 Kaunas, Lithuania

Received 8 October 2006 ,Revised 30 November 2006 ,Accepted 2 March 2007.

References 

  1. Clark GM. Research advances for cochlear implants. Auris Nasus Larynx. 1998;25:73–87
  2. von Ilberg C, Kiefer J, Tillein J, Pfenningdorff T, Hartmann R, Stürzebecher E, et al. Electric-acoustic stimulation of the auditory system. ORL. 1999;61:334–340
  3. Gao R, Basseas S, Bargiotas DT, Tsoukalas LH. Next-generation hearing prosthetics. IEEE Robot Automat Mag. 2003;21–25
  4. Kuchta J, Otto SR, Shannon RV, Hitselberger WE, Brackmann DE. The multichannel auditory brainstem implant: how many electrodes make sense?. J Neurosurg. 2004;100:16–23
  5. Wilson BS, Schatzer R, Lopez-Poveda EA, Sun X, Lawson DT, Wolford RD. Two new directions in speech processor design for cochlear implants. Ear Hear. 2005;26(4 Suppl.):73S–81S
  6. Loeb GE. Are cochlear implant patients suffering from perceptual dissonance?. Ear Hear. 2005;26(5):435–450
  7. Clark GM. The multiple-channel cochlear implant: the interface between sound and the central nervous system for hearing, speech, and language in deaf people-a personal perspective. Phil Trans R Soc B. 2006;361:791–810
  8. Henry BA, McKay CM, McDermott HJ, Clark GM. The relationship between speech perception and electrode discrimination in cochlear implantees. J Acoust Soc Am. 2000;108(3):1269–1280
  9. Fu QJ, Shannon RV. Frequency mapping in cochlear implants. Ear Hear. 2002;23(4):339–348
  10. Firszt JB, Holden LK, Skinner MW, Tobey EA, Peterson A, Gaggl W, et al. Recognition of speech presented at soft to loud levels by adult cochlear implant recipients of three cochlear implant systems. Ear Hear. 2004;25(4):375–387
  11. Bekesy GE. In:  Wever EG editors. Experiments in hearing. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1960;
  12. Greenwood DD. A cochlear frequency-position function for several species-29 years later. J Acoust Soc Am. 1990;87(6):2592–2605
  13. Baskent D, Shannon RV. Interactions between cochlear implant electrode insertion depth and frequency-place mapping. J Acoust Soc Am. 2005;117(3):1405–1415
  14. Baumann U, Nobbe A. The cochlear implant electrode-pitch function. Hear Res. 2006;213(1/2):34–42
  15. Gold T, Hearing II. The physical basis for the action of the cochlea. In: Proceedings of the Roal Society of London, B135. 1948;p. 492–498
  16. Zwicker E. A model describing nonlinearities in hearing by active processes with saturation at 40db. Biol Cybern. 1979;35:243–250
  17. Davis H. An active process in cochlear mechanics. Hear Res. 1983;9(1):79–90
  18. Geisler D. A cochlear model using feedback from motile outer hair cells. Hear Res. 1991;54:105–117
  19. Fettiplace R, Hackney CM. The sensory and motor roles of auditory hair cells. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2006;7(1):19–29
  20. Brownell WE, Bader CR, Bertrand D, de Ribaupierre Y. Evoked mechanical responses of isolated cochlear outer hair cells. Science. 1985;227:194–196
  21. Frank G, Hemmert W, Gummer AW. Limiting dynamics of high-frequency electromechanical transduction of outer hair cells. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA. 1999;96:4420–4425
  22. Zheng J, Shen W, He DZ, Long KB, Madison LD, Dallos P. Prestin is the motor protein of cochlear outer hair cells. Nature. 2000;149–155
  23. Belyantseva IA, Adler HJ, Curi R, Frolenkov GI, Kachar B. Expression and localization of prestin and the sugar transporter GLUT-5 during development of electromotility in cochlear outer hair cells. J Neurosci. 2000;20(24):RC116
  24. Dallos P, Fakler B. Prestin, a new type of motor protein. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2002;3:104–111
  25. Kennedy HJ, Crawford AC, Fettiplace R. Force generation by mammalian hair bundles supports a role in cochlear amplification. Nature. 2005;433(2):880–883
  26. Chan DK, Hudspeth AJ. Ca2+ current-driven nonlinear amplification by the mammalian cochlea in vitro. Nature Neurosci. 2005;8(2):149–155
  27. Crawford AC, Fettiplace R. The mechanical properties of ciliary bundles of turtle cochlear hair cells. J Physiol. 1985;364:359–379
  28. Martin P, Hudspeth AJ. Active hair-bundle movements can amplify a hair cell‘s response to oscillatory mechanical stimuli. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1999;96(25):14306–14311
  29. Manley GA. Evidence for an active process and a cochlear amplifier in nonmammals. J Neurophysiol. 2001;86(2):541–549[review]
  30. Ricci A. Active hair bundle movements and cochlear amplifier. J Am Acad Audiol. 2003;14(8):325–338
  31. Bozovic D, Hudspeth AJ. Hair-bundle movements elicited by transepithelial electrical stimulation of hair cells in the saccculus of the bullfrog. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003;100(3):958–963
  32. Vilfan A, Duke T. Two adaptation processes in auditory hair cells together can provide an active amplifier. Biophys J. 2003;85:191–203
  33. Jia S, He DZ. Motility-associated hair-bundle motion in mammalian outer hair cells. Nat Neurosci. 2005;8(8):1028–1034
  34. Kennedy HJ, Evans MG, Crawford AC, Fettiplace R. Depolarization of cochlear outer hair cells evokes active hair bundle motion by two mechanisms. J Neurosci. 2006;26(10):2757–2766
  35. Stasiunas A, Verikas A, Bacauskiene M, Miliauskas R, Stasiuniene N, Malmqvist K. Compression, adaptation and efferent control in a revised outer hair cell functional model. Med Eng Phys. 2005;27(9):780–789
  36. Stasiunas A, Verikas A, Kemesis P, Bacauskiene M, Miliauskas R, Stasiuniene N, et al. A multi-channel adaptive nonlinear filtering structure realizing some properties of the hearing system. Comput Biol Med. 2005;35(6):495–510
  37. Kha HN, Chen BK, Clark GM, Jones R. Stiffness properties for nucleus standard straight and contour electrode arrays. Med Eng Phys. 2004;26:677–685
  38. Wardrop P, Whinney D, Rebscher SJ, Roland JT, Luxford W, Leake PA. A temporal bone study of insertion trauma and intracochlear position of cochlear implant electrodes. I: Comparison of nucleus banded and nucleus contour electrodes. Hear Res. 2005;203(1/2):54–67
  39. Dorman M, Loizou P, Rainey D. Speech intelligibility as a function of the number of channels of stimulation for signal processors using sine-wave and noise-band outputs. J Acoust Soc Am. 1997;102:2403–2411
  40. Loizou PC. Introduction to cochlear implants. IEEE Eng Med Biol Mag. 1999;18(1):32–42
  41. Shannon RV, Fu Q-J, Galvin J. The number of spectral channels required for speech recognition depends on the difficulty of the listening situation. Acta Otolaryngol. 2004;(Suppl. 552):50–54
  42. Rubinstein JT. How cochlear implants encode speech. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2004;12(5):444–448
  43. Tonder N, Hartmann R, Klinke R. A versatile system for the generation and the development of speech coding strategies in cochlear implants. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1998;45(6):773–782
  44. Skinner MW, Holden LK, Whitford LA, Plant KL, Psarros C, Holden TA. Speech recognition with the Nucleus 24 SPEAK, ACE, and CIS speech coding strategies in newly implanted adults. Ear Hearing. 2002;23:207–223
  45. Holden LK, Vandali AE, Skinner MW, Fourakis MS, Holden TA. Speech recognition with the advanced combination encoder and transient emphasis spectral maxima strategies in nucleus 24 recipients. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2005;48(3):681–701
  46. MATLAB, Simulink. The MathWorks, Inc.
  47. Preyer S, Renz S, Hemmert W, Zenner H-P, Gummer AW. Receptor potential of outer hair cells isolated from base to apex of the adult guinea-pig cochlea: implications for cochlear tuning mechanisms. Aud Neurosci. 1996;2:145–157
  48. Scherer MP, Gummer AW. Vibration pattern of the organ of Corti up to 50kHz: evidence for resonant electromechanical force. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2004;21(101):17652–17657
  49. Liao Z, Popel AS. Modelling high-frequency electromotility of cochlear outer hair cell in microchamber experiment. J Acoust Soc Am. 2005;117(4):2147–2157
  50. Zwislocki JJ, Kletsky EJ. Tectorial membrane: a possible effect on frequency analysis in the cochlea. Science. 1979;204(4393):639–641
  51. Dallos P, Evans BN. High frequency motility of outer hair cells and the cochlear amplifier. Science. 1995;267:2006–2009
  52. Dallos P, Zheng J, Cheatham MA. Prestin and the cochlear amplifier. J Physiol. 2006;576.1:37–42

PII: S1350-4533(07)00043-4

doi: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2007.03.002

Medical Engineering & Physics
Volume 30, Issue 2 , Pages 171-181 , March 2008

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution