- Open Access
In-vitro characterization of a cochlear implant system for recording of evoked compound action potentials
© Neustetter et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2012
- Received: 25 October 2011
- Accepted: 25 April 2012
- Published: 25 April 2012
Modern cochlear implants have integrated recording systems for measuring electrically evoked compound action potentials of the auditory nerve. The characterization of such recording systems is important for establishing a reliable basis for the interpretation of signals acquired in vivo. In this study we investigated the characteristics of the recording system integrated into the MED-EL PULSARCI100 cochlear implant, especially its linearity and resolution, in order to develop a mathematical model describing the recording system.
In-vitro setup: The cochlear implant, including all attached electrodes, was fixed in a tank of physiologic saline solution. Sinusoidal signals of the same frequency but with different amplitudes were delivered via a signal generator for measuring and recording on a single electrode.
Computer simulations: A basic mathematical model including the main elements of the recording system, i.e. amplification and digitalization stage, was developed. For this, digital output for sinusoidal input signals of different amplitudes were calculated using in-vitro recordings as reference.
Using an averaging of 100 measurements the recording system behaved linearly down to approximately -60 dB of the input signal range. Using the same method, a system resolution of 10 μV was determined for sinusoidal signals. The simulation results were in very good agreement with the results obtained from in-vitro experiments.
The recording system implemented in the MED-EL PULSARCI100 cochlear implant for measuring the evoked compound action potential of the auditory nerve operates reliably. The developed mathematical model provides a good approximation of the recording system.
- Cochlear implant
- EAP recording system
- MED-EL PULSARCI100
- Sigma-delta modulation
- Adaptive sigma-delta modulation
- Noise shaping
Cochlear implants (CIs) are prostheses that aim to facilitate auditory perception and speech understanding in patients suffering from profound hearing loss. In normal hearing persons, hair cells inside the cochlea transform acoustic signals into complex patterns of neural signals. These are then transported along the auditory nerve to the brain where they are perceived as sound. In a typical CI patient the hair cells are damaged or absent. CIs make up for this loss by delivering electrical pulses to electrodes located inside the cochlea, which in turn stimulate auditory nerve cells to elicit hearing sensations [1, 2]. Many studies have demonstrated that cochlear implantation improves the daily life of patients [3–5], and in particular allows young children with congenital deafness to experience almost normal hearing and speech development [6, 7]. Other studies have shown that patients with single sided deafness and suffering from tinnitus can also benefit from cochlear implantation [8–10].
The demands on such EAP recording systems are very high: Signal waveforms with small amplitudes have to be acquired with high temporal resolution and in the presence of interfering signals like stimulation artifacts, which occur as a result of stimulation current and amount to voltages of several 100 mV at the recording electrode. Therefore, recording systems must be designed carefully to prevent an overload on system components due to these large voltages. The characterization of such recording systems is important for establishing a reliable basis for the interpretation of signals acquired in vivo. The EAP recording system of the MED-EL i100-core family is based on sigma-delta modulation, which is a standard technique for analog-to-digital conversion . The Sigma-Delta Modulator (SDM) implemented in the tested implant can be operated in standard or adaptive mode . This recording system is implemented in the MED-EL cochlear implants of the type PULSARCI100, SONATATI100 and CONCERTO . The aim of this study was to characterize the EAP recording system implemented in the MED-EL PULSARCI100 cochlear implant with regard to system linearity and resolution. In addition, a mathematical model was created to appropriately describe the tested recording system.
Testing was performed by means of in-vitro experiments which comprised of a simple setup replicating a nearly realistic EAP recording situation. In this study we used sinusoidal signals which are a standard signal type for system characterization purposes.
In order to develop a mathematical description of the tested EAP recording system, a model including the relevant system parts was defined. The results of the corresponding simulations were used as a reference for the interpretation of the results obtained from the in-vitro recordings.
Additional testing of implant hardware was performed with a pin-board version of the electronic chip implemented in the tested implant. This provided several input and output channels of the Application Specific Integrated Circuit (ASIC) of the implant.
Other than the electronic components for stimulation, the implant also includes electronic components for measuring purposes, such as for the recording of EAPs. For EAP measurements the recording electrode needs to be different from the stimulation electrode as large transients due to residing charge at the stimulation electrode distort the measurement. The reference electrode for EAP recordings (EAP_GND) is different form RG and is located in the implant housing.
The recording was started 150 μs after the beginning of the stimulation pulse, and E2 was used as the measuring electrode. After each recording and the transmitting of the read-back command, the binary sequence was read back via the RIB2 interface and stored on a computer. A series of 100 recordings were performed for each signal amplitude and SDM mode.
For further analysis of the recordings the corresponding SDM outputs were used. It should be noted that the SDM outputs are different in standard and adaptive mode. In standard mode the SDM output is simply the two value binary sequence, while in adaptive mode the SDM output is a multi-bit signal which is reconstructed from the two-value binary sequence . The measurements taken with each mode were analysed for single recordings and for calculating averages. For the latter we used the mean SDM output, which was calculated by averaging 100 SDM outputs in each series of measurements.
Waveforms and spectra
The waveforms of the in-vitro recordings were obtained by low-pass filtering the SDM outputs. The applied FIR-filter features a cut-off frequency of approximately 8 kHz with a slope steeping approximately -120 dB/octave, and an impulse response with a duration of 0.3 ms. The waveforms of the generator output were transmitted in the same way as they were delivered by the data acquisition device, without extra filtering or averaging being done.
The spectra of the in-vitro recordings were obtained by discrete Fourier transformation of the SDM output (Matlab FFT, 2048 data points). In order to reduce a leakage effect due to the limited duration of the recording, the window function g 0 3.5 = (cos(πt)) 5 rect(t) as suggested by Zierhofer  was used for calculating the spectra. This window function features a side lope ripple decay of 120 dB/decade.
The spectra of the generator were calculated by discrete Fourier transformation of the generator output (Matlab FFT, 340 data points). Therefore, only the measured waveforms occurring within a recording period of 1.7 ms and in the same window function as mentioned above were used.
The remaining figures in this paper depict the magnitude spectra which is simply referred to as the "spectra".
Linearity and resolution
In order to determine the linearity of the recording system, we used the results obtained from the spectra. The amplitude of the main signal components at 4.3 kHz were plotted against the amplitude of the corresponding generator signals. Thus, for an ideal system behaving in a linear way the data points of such a diagram are expected to follow a straight line.
The resolution of the recording system was determined based on the reproducibility of the waveforms obtained in-vitro. As a measure of reproducibility, we calculated the mean variance of all possible pairs of waveforms within the same measurement series i.e. all waveforms obtained with the same amplitude of the generator signal. The variance in each pair of waveforms was calculated as the two-fold standard deviation of the difference signal, which was obtained by subtracting the waveforms from each other. For this calculation only the section of the waveforms that were not contaminated by filter onset-offset effects were used. Using the described procedure we estimated the resolution of the system for waveforms obtained from single recordings and those obtained from the average of 100 recordings.
Single recordings with standard and adaptive mode
The noise level comprised of two parts. For frequencies above approximately 20 kHz noise was dominated by quantization noise, while for low frequencies the noise level was dominated by amplifier noise, which is independent of the used SDM mode. While the high frequency components of the SDM quantization noise are damped effectively depending on the used low-pass filter, the amplifier noise within the signal band poses a limiting factor on the measurement of small signals and thus determines the resolution of the tested recording system.
Averaged recordings with standard and adaptive mode
Compared to single in-vitro measurements the waveforms obtained by averaging 100 recordings showed a better resolution of small signals. This was true for recordings obtained in both SDM modes.
System linearity and resolution
In this study the resolution of the EAP recording system was based on the reproducibility of the recorded waveforms. To achieve this, it is necessary to have stable and reproducible test signals, which in these experiments were delivered by the signal generator. With in-vitro measurements a resolution of about 80 μV was determined for single recordings, and a resolution of about 10 μV was determined when using the average of 100 recordings. The increase in resolution can be explained by the lower noise level observed with averaged recordings rather than with single recordings. The determined resolutions were almost independent from signal amplitude and SDM mode. It should be noted that generally the particular value of the resolution depends on the pass-band width of the used low-pass filter, which determines the actual noise power within the waveforms. The in-vitro experiments in this study were performed with sinusoidal test signals. The relationship between resolution and signal type needs to be further investigated. The resolution determined in our experiments is of the same magnitude as the resolution limit found in recordings with a MED-EL SONATATI 100 user . Bahmer et al. showed amplitude growth sequences where EAP amplitudes were resolved down to approximately 20 μV. In their experiments they used an averaging of 50 recordings and a low-pass filter with a drop-off of 6 kHz -3 dB and 16 kHz -60 dB.
When comparing the waveforms obtained from the simulations of each mode, no relevant differences were found in between them. Therefore, only the waveforms obtained in adaptive SDM are plotted in Figure 8b. The waveforms are depicted without offset and without the regions affected by filter onset-offset effects. The simulation results agree with the experimental results except for the presence of the transient signal due to residual stimulation artifact, as this was not considered in the mathematical model.
For a better comparison, the spectra of the simulations were plotted against the corresponding in-vitro results. The spectra obtained with both SDM modes are shown in Figure 9c and 9d for single recordings, and in Figure 10c and 10d for averaged recordings. The noise level and noise shape observed in the simulations, as well as the amplitude of the main signal and the offset components, are consistent with the experimental results. Higher harmonic components emerging in the in-vitro recordings are missing in the spectra of the simulations as the mathematical model included a linear amplifier.
The sigma-delta based EAP recording system of the MED-EL PULSARCI100 cochlear implant operates reliably in both, standard and adaptive mode.
Determination of system linearity and system resolution is limited by the observed noise level.
When using averaged recordings (100 measurements) the system revealed linear behavior down to about -60 dB. The corresponding system resolution was 10 μV for sinusoidal signals, and was almost independent of SDM mode and signal amplitude.
The good agreement between the simulations and the EAP recording results justifies the use of the mathematical model for describing the tested EAP recording system.
The Authors would like to thank MED-EL GmbH (Innsbruck, Austria) for providing the PULSARCI100 cochlear implant. The authors are especially thankful for the helpful comments made by Reinhold Schatzer and Andreas Griessner from the C. Doppler Laboratory, and by Stefan Strahl from MED-EL. The support of Otto Peter and Martin Ruetz on the RIB2 system is also appreciated.
- Zeng FG, Rebscher S, Harrison W, Sun X, Feng H: Cochlear Implants: System Design, Integration, and Evaluation. IEEE Rev Biomed Eng 2008, 1: 115–142.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Wilson BS, Dorman MF: Cochlear implants: Current design and future possibilities. J Rehabil Res Dev 2008, 45(5):695–730. 10.1682/JRRD.2007.10.0173View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Cohen SM, Labadie RF, Dietrich MS, Haynes DS: Quality of life in hearing-impaired adults: the role of cochlear implants and hearing aids. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2004, 131(4):413–422. 10.1016/j.otohns.2004.03.026View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Laske RD, Veraguth D, Dillier N, Binkert A, Holzmann D, Huber AM: Subjective and objective results after bilateral cochlear implantation in adults. Otol Neurotol 2009, 30(3):313–318. 10.1097/MAO.0b013e31819bd7e6View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kunimoto M, Yamanaka N, Kimura T, Yoda J, Yokoyama M, Togawa A, Oka M: The benefit of cochlear implantation in the Japanese elderly. Auris Nasus larynx 1999, 26(2):131–137. 10.1016/S0385-8146(98)00066-2View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- McConkey Robbins A, Koch D, Osberger M, Zimmerman-Phillips S, Kishon-Rabin L: Effect of age at cochlear implantation on auditory skill development in infants and toddlers. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2004, 130: 570–574. 10.1001/archotol.130.5.570View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Haensel J, Engelke JC, Ottenjann W, Westhofen M: Long-term results of cochlear implantation in children. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2005, 132(3):456–458. 10.1016/j.otohns.2004.09.021View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kleinjung T, Steffens T, Strutz J, Langguth B: Curing tinnitus with a Cochlear Implant in a patient with unilateral sudden deafness: a case report. Cases Journal 2009, 2: 7462. 10.1186/1757-1626-2-7462View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Pan T, Tyler R, Ji H, Coelho C, Gehringer A, Gogel S: Changes in the tinnitus handicap questionnaire after cochlear implantation. Am J Audiol 2009, 18(2):144–151. 10.1044/1059-0889(2009/07-0042)View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Van de Heyning P, Vermeire K, Deibl M, Nopp P, Anderson I, De Ridder D: Incapacitating Unilateral Tinnitus in Single-Sided Deafness Treated by Cochlear Implantation. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2008, 117(9):645–652.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Brown CJ, Abbas PJ, Gantz B: Electrically evoked whole-nerve action potentials: data from human cochlear implant users. J Acoust Soc Am 1990, 88(3):1385–1391. 10.1121/1.399716View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Miller CA, Brown CJ, Abbas PJ, Chi SL: The clinical application of potentials evoked from the peripheral auditory system. Hear Res 2008, 242: 184–197. 10.1016/j.heares.2008.04.005View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Jeon EK, Brown CJ, Etler CP, O'Brien S, Chiou LK, Abbas PJ: Comparison of Electrically Evoked Compound Action Potential Thresholds and Loudness Estimates for the Stimuli Used to Program the Advanced Bionics Cochlear Implant. J Am Acad Audiol 2010, 21(1):16–27. 10.3766/jaaa.21.1.3View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Brill S, Müller J, Hagen R, Möltner A, Brockmeier S, Stark T, Helbig S, Maurer J, Zahnert T, Zierhofer C, Nopp P, Anderson I, Strahl S: Site of cochlear stimulation and its effect on electrically evoked compound action potentials using the MED-EL standard electrode array. Biomed Eng Online 2009, 8: 40. 10.1186/1475-925X-8-40View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Hughes ML: Fundamentals of Clinical ECAP Measures in Cochlear Implants-Part 1: Use of the ECAP in Speech Processor Programming. Audiology Online 2006, 1569.Google Scholar
- McKay CM, Fewster L, Dawson P: A different approach to using neural response telemetry for automated cochlear implant processor programming. Ear Hear 2005, 26(4 Suppl):38S-44S.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Spitzer P: Measurement of the Compound Action Potential of the Auditory Nerve using the PULSARCI 100 Cochlear Implant. PhD thesis. Institute of Ion Physics and Applied Physics, University of Innsbruck, Austria; 2006.Google Scholar
- Candy JC, Temes GC: Oversampling Delta-Sigma Data Converters. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Press; 1992.Google Scholar
- Zierhofer CM: Adaptive sigma-delta modulation with one-bit quantization. IEEE Trans Circuits Syst II, Analog Digit Signal Process 2000, 47(5):408–415. 10.1109/82.842109View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Zierhofer CM: Multichannel cochlear implant with neural response telemetry. U.S. Patent 7 382 850 2008.Google Scholar
- Hochmair I, Nopp P, Jolly C, Schmidt M, Schösser H, Garnham C, Anderson I: MED-EL Cochlear Implants: State of the Art and Glimpse into the Future. Trends Amplif 2006, 10(4):201–220. 10.1177/1084713806296720View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Bahmer A, Peter O, Baumann U: Recording and analysis of electrically evoked compound action potentials (ECAPs) with MED-EL cochlear implants and different artefact reduction strategies in Matlab. J Neurosci Meth 2010, 191: 66–74. 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2010.06.008View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Zierhofer CM: Data Window With Tunable Side Lobe Ripple Decay. IEEE Signal Process. Lett 2007, 14(11):824–827.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.