Comparison of Two Place-Based Mapping Procedures on Masked Sentence Recognition as a Function of Electrode Array Angular Insertion Depth and Presence of Acoustic Low-Frequency Information: A Simulation Study.
Comparison of Two Place-Based Mapping Procedures on Masked Sentence Recognition as a Function of Electrode Array Angular Insertion Depth and Presence of Acoustic Low-Frequency Information: A Simulation Study.
复制标题
作为电极阵列角度插入深度和声学低频信息存在的函数的掩蔽句子识别的两种基于位置的映射程序的比较：模拟研究。
DOI：
10.1159/000531262
复制
发表时间：
2023
影响因子：
1.6
通讯作者：
O'Connell,BrendanP
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Dillon,MargaretT;Buss,Emily;Johnson,AlecD;Canfarotta,MichaelW;O'Connell,BrendanP
人工耳蜗植入（CI）和电声刺激（EAS）用户使用将电子滤波器频率与耳蜗位置频率对齐的地图（称为基于位置的地图）可能会比使用呈现频谱移位信息的地图体验到更好的性能。个别基于位置的定位程序在与耳蜗张力性相一致的频率内容与丢弃或频谱移位的频率内容不同。由于电极阵列的角度插入深度（AID）的个体差异以及植入耳中是否可获得功能性声学低频信息，不同位置图的性能优势可能会有所不同。本研究比较了掩蔽语音识别与两种类型的基于位置的地图的功能，作为AID和声学低频信息的存在。方法60例听力正常的成人急性聆听两种基于位置图的CI或EAS模拟，其中1例为浅层AIDs电极阵列。严格位置图（strict - pb）将低频和中频信息与耳蜗张力对齐，并丢弃与最尖端电极接触相关的频率以下的信息。另一种基于位置的地图（LFshift-PB）将中频信息与耳蜗张力性对齐，并通过压缩顶端电极接触（即< 1 kHz）上的低频信息提供更多的语音频谱。通过将单个通道的载波频率指定为相关电极接触的耳蜗位置频率，模拟了3个12通道24mm电极阵列的实际情况。病例1、病例2、病例3、病例3与耳蜗接触频率分别为460、498 Hz、389、728 Hz和335、987 Hz。结果一般来说，在病例1和2中，使用Strict-PB映射观察到更好的性能，其中与LFshift-PB映射的最顶端通道的不匹配为2 - 4个八度。在案例3的映射之间观察到类似的性能。对于CI模拟，Strict-PB映射的性能随着AID的降低而下降，而LFshift-PB映射的性能在不同情况下保持稳定。对于EAS模拟，Strict-PB映射的性能在不同情况下保持稳定，而LFshift-PB映射的性能随着AID的降低而提高。结论听者表现出Strict-PB和LFshift-PB图谱的差异，这是AID和声学低频信息是否可用的函数（CI vs EAS）。这些数据支持AIDs≥335的Strict-PB制图程序的使用，尽管需要进一步的研究，包括CI和EAS用户的适应时间。
IntroductionCochlear implant (CI) and electric-acoustic stimulation (EAS) users may experience better performance with maps that align the electric filter frequencies to the cochlear place frequencies, known as place-based maps, than with maps that present spectrally shifted information. Individual place-based mapping procedures differ in the frequency content that is aligned to cochlear tonotopicity versus discarded or spectrally shifted. The performance benefit with different place-based maps may vary due to individual differences in angular insertion depth (AID) of the electrode array and whether functional acoustic low-frequency information is available in the implanted ear. The present study compared masked speech recognition with two types of place-based maps as a function of AID and presence of acoustic low-frequency information.MethodsSixty adults with normal hearing listened acutely to CI or EAS simulations of two types of place-based maps for one of three cases of electrode arrays at shallow AIDs. The strict place-based (Strict-PB) map aligned the low-and mid-frequency information to cochlear tonotopicity and discarded information below the frequency associated with the most apical electrode contact. The alternative place-based map (LFshift-PB) aligned the mid-frequency information to cochlear tonotopicity and provided more of the speech spectrum by compressing low-frequency information on the apical electrode contacts (ie,< 1 kHz). Three actual cases of a 12-channel, 24-mm electrode array were simulated by assigning the carrier frequency for an individual channel as the cochlear place frequency of the associated electrode contact. The AID and cochlear place frequency for the most apical electrode contact were 460 and 498 Hz for case 1, 389 and 728 Hz for case 2, and 335 and 987 Hz for case 3, respectively.ResultsGenerally, better performance was observed with the Strict-PB maps for cases 1 and 2, where mismatches were 2–4 octaves for the most apical channel with the LFshift-PB map. Similar performance was observed between maps for case 3. For the CI simulations, performance with the Strict-PB map declined with decreases in AID, while performance with the LFshift-PB map remained stable across cases. For the EAS simulations, performance with the Strict-PB map remained stable across cases, while performance with the LFshift-PB map improved with decreases in AID.ConclusionsListeners demonstrated differences with the Strict-PB versus LFshift-PB maps as a function of AID and whether acoustic low-frequency information was available (CI vs. EAS). These data support the use of the Strict-PB mapping procedure for AIDs≥ 335, though further study including time for acclimatization in CI and EAS users is warranted.