Advertisement

Development of a \(\upmu \)CT-based Patient-Specific Model of the Electrically Stimulated Cochlea

  • Ahmet CakirEmail author
  • Benoit M. Dawant
  • Jack H. Noble
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10433)

Abstract

Cochlear implants (CIs) are neural prosthetics that are used to treat sensory-based hearing loss. There are over 320,000 recipients worldwide. After implantation, each CI recipient goes through a sequence of programming sessions where audiologists determine several CI processor settings to attempt to optimize hearing outcomes. However, this process is difficult because there are no objective measures available to indicate what setting changes will lead to better hearing outcomes. It has been shown that a simplified model of electrically induced neural activation patterns within the cochlea can be created using patient CT images, and that audiologists can use this information to determine settings that lead to better hearing performance. A more comprehensive physics-based patient-specific model of neural activation has the potential to lead to even greater improvement in outcomes. In this paper, we propose a method to create such customized electro-anatomical models of the electrically stimulated cochlea. We compare the accuracy of our patient-specific models to the accuracy of generic models. Our results show that the patient-specific models are on average more accurate than the generic models, which motivates the use of a patient-specific modeling approach for cochlear implant patients.

Keywords

Cochlear implant Modeling Auditory nerve 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research has been supported by NIH grant R01DC014037. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of this institute.

References

  1. 1.
    Holden, L.K., Finley, C.C., Firszt, J.B., Holden, T.A., Brenner, C., Potts, L.G., Gotter, B.D., Vanderhoof, S.S., Mispagel, K., Heydebrand, G., et al.: Factors affecting open-set word recognition in adults with cochlear implants. Ear Hear. 34(3), 342 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Noble, J.H., Gifford, R.H., Hedley-Williams, A.J., Dawant, B.M., Labadie, R.F.: Clinical evaluation of an image-guided cochlear implant programming strategy. Audiol. Neurotol. 19(6), 400–411 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Noble, J.H., Labadie, R.F., Gifford, R.H., Dawant, B.M.: Image-guidance enables new methods for customizing cochlear implant stimulation strategies. IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 21(5), 820–829 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Whiten, D.M.: Electro-anatomical models of the cochlear implant. Ph.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kalkman, R.K., Briaire, J.J., Frijns, J.H.: Current focussing in cochlear implants: an analysis of neural recruitment in a computational model. Hear. Res. 322, 89–98 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Goldwyn, J.H., Bierer, S.M., Bierer, J.A.: Modeling the electrode-neuron interface of cochlear implants: effects of neural survival, electrode placement, and the partial tripolar configuration. Hear. Res. 268(1), 93–104 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hanekom, T.: Three-dimensional spiraling finite element model of the electrically stimulated cochlea. Ear Hear. 22(4), 300–315 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Avci, E., Nauwelaers, T., Lenarz, T., Hamacher, V., Kral, A.: Variations in microanatomy of the human cochlea. J. Comp. Neurol. 522(14), 3245–3261 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cakir, A., Dawant, B.M., Noble, J.H.: Evaluation of a \(\mu \)ct-based electro-anatomical cochlear implant model. In: SPIE Medical Imaging, International Society for Optics and Photonics, pp. 97860M–97860M (2016)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Malherbe, T., Hanekom, T., Hanekom, J.: Constructing a three-dimensional electrical model of a living cochlear implant user’s cochlea. Int. J. Numer. Meth. Biomed. Eng. 32(7), e02751 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Geddes, L., Baker, L.: The specific resistance of biological material-a compendium of data for the biomedical engineer and physiologist. Med. Biol. Eng. 5(3), 271–293 (1967)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Press, W.H.: Numerical Recipes: The Art of Scientific Computing, 3rd edn. Cambridge University Press, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Noble, J.H., Labadie, R.F., Majdani, O., Dawant, B.M.: Automatic segmentation of intracochlear anatomy in conventional CT. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 58(9), 2625–2632 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bookstein, F.: Thin-plate splines and the decomposition of deformation. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 10, 849–865 (1988)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ahmet Cakir
    • 1
    Email author
  • Benoit M. Dawant
    • 1
  • Jack H. Noble
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer ScienceVanderbilt UniversityNashvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations