2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2008.04.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Intraneural stimulation for auditory prosthesis: Modiolar trunk and intracranial stimulation sites

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

4
46
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 45 publications
(50 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
4
46
0
Order By: Relevance
“…5, A and C) is consistent with the fact that cell membrane time constants tend to increase with BF in the CNIC (Geis and Borst 2009). Furthermore, these results resemble a comparable trend observed in the CNIC during electrical stimulation of the AN where higher limiting stimulation rates and shorter latencies were observed for low BF CNIC neurons (Middlebrooks and Snyder 2008).…”
Section: Functional Implicationssupporting
confidence: 85%
“…5, A and C) is consistent with the fact that cell membrane time constants tend to increase with BF in the CNIC (Geis and Borst 2009). Furthermore, these results resemble a comparable trend observed in the CNIC during electrical stimulation of the AN where higher limiting stimulation rates and shorter latencies were observed for low BF CNIC neurons (Middlebrooks and Snyder 2008).…”
Section: Functional Implicationssupporting
confidence: 85%
“…New electrode designs that can benefit from biological interventions aimed at protecting the SGNs and regenerating their peripheral processes coupled with new stimulation strategies aimed at delivering more focused ES are likely to lead to improvements in cochlear implant performance in the future [59,60]. Moreover, the development of high resolution electrode arrays for direct implantation into the auditory nerve [61] would rely on very good neural survival. Finally, future interventions that combine drug delivery and new electrode designs may be able to take advantage of the re-sprouting capacity of SGN peripheral processes to achieve a more direct interface between the electrode and the nerve to provide high resolution electrical stimulation.…”
Section: Clinical Implications and Future Directionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The transcochlear approach through the basal cochlear turn described by Simmons [1966] and Badi et al [2002] destroys the cochlear structures and is associated with a high incidence of cerebrospinal fluid leakage from the fundus of the internal auditory canal [Miller and Hillman, 2006]. The middle cranial fossa approach [Assenova et al, 2007] also has its inherent risks of craniotomy, including meningitis and cerebrospinal fluid leakage [Middlebrooks and Snyder, 2008]. Similarly, the posterior fossa approach to the intracranial part of the auditory nerve comprises craniotomy-related risks.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Similarly, the posterior fossa approach to the intracranial part of the auditory nerve comprises craniotomy-related risks. Moreover, the tonotopic organization within the intracranial portion of the nerve might be more variable than in the modiolar trunk [Middlebrooks and Snyder, 2008]. The infralabyrinthine route opens an access to the internal auditory canal portion of the auditory nerve and preserves the bony labyrinth.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%