Advertisement

The Use of Telemetry-Evoked Compound Action Potentials (TECAP) in Cochlear Implantation

  • Justus Ilgner
  • W. H. Döring
  • M. Westhofen
Conference paper
Part of the IFMBE Proceedings book series (IFMBE, volume 13)

Abstract

For about 20 years, Cochlear Implants have successfully restored hearing in postlingual deaf or helped to acquire auditory communication in prelingual deaf patients. However, only in recent years Cochlear Implant manufacturers have implemented stimulating and recording protocols for evoked compound action potentials in order to assess auditory nerve function in relation to the implanted device. Along with the principles of stimulation and recording of TECAPs, two cases are presented which highlight their diagnostic value as well as their limitations. While the pooled data obtained from patients are yet too variable to serve as a predictor for individual stimulation strategies, TECAPs are highly useful in intraindividual follow-up of patients in whom Cochlear Implant stimulation currents may vary even after years and who require re-adjustment according to objectively registered neural responses.

Keywords

Cochlear Implant Compound action potential Inner Ear Hearing Rehabilitation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Moller AR (2006) History of cochlear implants and auditory brainstem implants. Adv Otorhinolaryngol 64:1–10Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Geers AE (2006) Factors influencing spoken language outcomes in children following early cochlear implantation. Adv Otorhinolaryngol 64:50–65Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Harrison RV, Gordon KA, Mount RJ (2005) Is there a critical period for cochlear implantation in congenitally deaf children? Analyses of hearing and speech perception performance after implantation. Dev Psychobiol 46(3):252–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Papsin BC (2005) Cochlear implantation in children with anomalous cochleovestibular anatomy. Laryngoscope 115(1 Pt 2 Suppl 106):1–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zeng FG (2004) Trends in cochlear implants. Trends Amplif 8(1):1–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mylanus EA, Rotteveel LJ, Leeuw RL (2004) Congenital malformation of the inner ear and pediatric cochlear implantation. Otol Neurotol 25(3):308–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Incesulu A, Kocaturk S, Vural M (2004) Cochlear implantation in chronic otitis media. J Laryngol Otol 118(1):3–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    El-Kashlan HK, Telian SA (2004) Cochlear implantation in the chronically diseased ear. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 12(5):384–6Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Das S, Buchman CA (2005) Bilateral cochlear implantation: current concepts. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 13(5):290–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    McDermott HJ (2004) Music perception with cochlear implants: a review. Trends Amplif 8(2):49–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Roland PS, Wright CG (2006) Surgical aspects of cochlear implantation: mechanisms of insertional trauma. Adv Otorhinolaryngol 64:11–30Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Briggs RJ, Tykocinski M, Stidham K, Roberson JB (2005) Cochleostomy site: implications for electrode placement and hearing preservation. Acta Otolaryngol 125(8):870–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Callanan V, Poje C (2004) Cochlear implantation and meningitis. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 68(5):545–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cafarelli Dees D, Dillier N, Lai WK, von Wallenberg E, van Dijk B, Akdas F, Aksit M, Batman C, Beynon A, Burdo S, Chanal JM, Collet L, Conway M, Coudert C, Craddock L, Cullington H, Deggouj N, Fraysse B, Grabel S, Kiefer J, Kiss JG, Lenarz T, Mair A, Maune S, Muller-Deile J, Piron JP, Razza S, Tasche C, Thai-Van H, Toth F, Truy E, Uziel A, Smoorenburg GF (2005) Normative findings of electrically evoked compound action potential measurements using the neural response telemetry of the Nucleus CI24M cochlear implant system. Audiol Neurootol 10(2):105–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dillier N, Lai WK, Almqvist B, Frohne C, Muller-Deile J, Stecker M, von Wallenberg E (2002) Measurement of the electrically evoked compound action potential via a neural response telemetry system. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 111(5 Pt 1):407–14Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gillespie LN, Shepherd RK (2005) Clinical application of neurotrophic factors: the potential for primary auditory neuron protection. Eur J Neurosci 22(9):2123–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Federation for Medical and Biological Engineering 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck SurgeryUniversity of Aachen RWTHAachenGermany

Personalised recommendations