Elsevier

Hearing Research

Volume 238, Issues 1–2, April 2008, Pages 110-117
Hearing Research

Review
Cochlear implants and brain plasticity

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2007.08.004Get rights and content

Abstract

Cochlear implants have been implanted in over 110,000 deaf adults and children worldwide and provide these patients with important auditory cues necessary for auditory awareness and speech perception via electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve (AN). In 1942, Woolsey and Walzl presented the first report of cortical responses to localised electrical stimulation of different sectors of the AN in normal hearing cats, and established the cochleotopic organization of the projections to primary auditory cortex. Subsequently, individual cortical neurons in normal hearing animals have been shown to have well characterized input–output functions for electrical stimulation and decreasing response latencies with increasing stimulus strength. However, the central auditory system is not immutable, and has a remarkable capacity for plastic change, even into adulthood, as a result of changes in afferent input. This capacity for change is likely to contribute to the ongoing clinical improvements observed in speech perception for cochlear implant users. This review examines the evidence for changes of the response properties of neurons in, and consequently the functional organization of, the central auditory system produced by chronic, behaviourally relevant, electrical stimulation of the AN in profoundly deaf humans and animals.

Introduction

Worldwide, over 110,000 deaf adult and children benefit from direct electrical stimulation of their AN via a cochlear implant. Implant recipients exhibit a wide range of speech perception skills with a range of factors identified as affecting clinical performance (Blamey et al., 1996). The level of performance of pre-linguistically deaf adults generally remains well below that of post-linguistically deaf adults (Busby and Clark, 1999, Busby et al., 1993, Eddington et al., 1978). It is remarkable that the best patients can exhibit near-normal open-set speech perception, at least in a quiet environment, given the abnormal (and in many ways impoverished) input provided by these devices. The importance of auditory experience in the clinical performance of cochlear implant users has been consistently emphasized (Blamey et al., 1996, Gantz et al., 1993, Rubinstein et al., 1999). Clearly, changes within the auditory system underlie some of the improvements in speech perception seen in implant patients with device use, although it has not been established whether the improvements are mediated by changes in auditory cortex per se.

The capacity for plasticity in the response properties of neurons in, and consequently the functional organization of, cortical and sub-cortical sensory structures was generally believed to be maximal within ‘critical periods’ during early development (Hensch, 2004). It was believed that changes in experience during these early periods – when neuronal pathways and connections were being formed – but not later in life could drive changes in sensory processing mechanisms. However, the capacity for plasticity in adult sensory systems, given appropriate patterns of behaviourally significant input, has more recently become generally accepted (for review see Kaas and Florence, 2001) and confirmed in the auditory system (for reviews see Irvine, 2007, Weinberger, 2007).

The effects of restrictions in output from the cochlea, in both immature and adult animals, on the tonotopic organisation (for review see Irvine and Wright, 2005) and the temporal processing ability (Bao et al., 2004), of the thalamo-cortical auditory system have been well characterised. Less well studied are the effects of chronic, behaviourally relevant, electrical stimulation of the AN – similar to that used in cochlear implants – on cochleotopic organisation and temporal processing.

Complicating the interpretation of plasticity in the auditory cortex produced by such stimulation is that there are many changes consequent on a sensorineural hearing loss that almost invariably precede the chronic stimulation (for review see Shepherd et al., 2006). These changes include: significant reduction in spiral ganglion neurons; de-myelination of residual spiral ganglion neuron soma and possibly part of their central processes; shrinkage of the perikaryon of neurons throughout the auditory pathway; and reduced spontaneous activity throughout the auditory pathway. As many of the changes associated with sensorineural hearing loss are ‘down-stream’ from the cortex in the auditory pathway, they affect the input, and the organization of that input, into the auditory cortex. This problem of interpretation due to down-stream changes is equally true of changes associated with chronic stimulation.

It is also important to note that not all changes in neural responsiveness and organization are necessarily plastic in nature, as some changes can be explained as passive consequences of the altered input. For example, the frequency tuning of AN fibres, and consequently of neurons throughout the auditory pathway, is immediately altered after destruction of the outer hair cells (Dallos and Harris, 1978). It is also not always a simple matter to distinguish between plastic and non-plastic changes (Calford, 2002, Irvine and Wright, 2005). However, we will define plasticity as involving some form of active or dynamic modification of neural properties resulting from the altered input.

This paper will review the evidence of plastic changes in the central auditory system resulting from chronic electrical stimulation of the AN, with an emphasis on behaviourally relevant stimulation. First, evidence from animal studies focussing on the response properties of neurons in, and the functional organization of, the primary auditory cortex (AI) will be reviewed. Second, electrophysiological and functional imaging studies of the auditory cortex in cochlear implant patients will be reviewed. Finally, the relationship between the reported changes in the auditory cortex and psychophysical studies of both pitch and speech perception will be discussed.

Section snippets

Basic response properties

Individual neurons within layer III/IV of AI of normal hearing (or acutely deafened) cats have well characterized input–output functions for electrical stimulation (Hartmann et al., 1997, Popelar et al., 1995, Raggio and Schreiner, 2003, Schreiner and Raggio, 1996). Neurons exhibit either monotonic (∼55%) or non-monotonic input–output functions, with dynamic ranges of approximately 10 dB, and minimum first spike latencies of around 8 ms. Cortical field potentials exhibit both a short- (<80 ms) and

Electrophysiology

Evidence from clinical studies of the P1 evoked cortical potential indicates that there is a sensitive period, ending around 3.5 years of age, during which the human central auditory pathway is maximally plastic (Eggermont and Ponton, 2003, Ponton and Eggermont, 2001, Ponton et al., 1996, Sharma et al., 2002). Children who receive effective cochlear stimulation within this period develop electrically evoked cortical potentials with latencies (∼100 ms) that reach those of aged-matched

Conclusion

A growing body of functional imaging and psychophysical studies in humans and predominantly neurophysiological studies in animals is providing further evidence for plasticity in the central auditory pathway. It is clear that genetic cues are sufficient to generate a basic framework, with the development of at least a rudimentary pathway in the absence of any auditory experience, which is sufficient to provide both the temporal and spatial cues necessary for speech perception using a cochlear

Acknowledgement

The authors’ research is supported by the National Institute of Deafness and Communication Disorders of the USA (N01-DC-3-1005).

References (93)

  • M. Pelizzone et al.

    Activation of the auditory cortex by cochlear stimulation in a deaf patient

    Neurosci. Lett.

    (1986)
  • J. Popelar et al.

    Middle latency responses to acoustical and electrical stimulation of the cochlea in cats

    Hear. Res.

    (1995)
  • G. Rebillard et al.

    Factors affecting the recording of visual-evoked potentials from the deaf cat primary auditory cortex (AI)

    Brain Res.

    (1980)
  • A. Sharma et al.

    The influence of a sensitive period on central auditory development in children with unilateral and bilateral cochlear implants

    Hear. Res.

    (2005)
  • R.L. Snyder et al.

    Chronic intracochlear electrical stimulation in the neonatally deafened cat. I. Expansion of central representation

    Hear. Res.

    (1990)
  • D.L. Stewart et al.

    Absence of visually influenced cells in auditory cortex of normal and congenitally deaf cats

    Exp. Neurol.

    (1970)
  • N.M. Weinberger

    Auditory associative memory and representational plasticity in the primary auditory cortex

    Hear. Res.

    (2007)
  • S. Bao et al.

    Temporal plasticity in the primary auditory cortex induced by operant perceptual learning

    Nat. Neurosci.

    (2004)
  • Y. Berthezene et al.

    Auditory cortex activation in deaf subjects during cochlear electrical stimulation. Evaluation by functional magnetic resonance imaging

    Invest. Radiol.

    (1997)
  • P. Blamey et al.

    Factors affecting auditory performance of postlinguistically deaf adults using cochlear implants

    Audiol. Neurootol.

    (1996)
  • P.J. Blamey et al.

    Relationships among speech perception, production, language, hearing loss, and age in children with impaired hearing

    J. Speech. Lang. Hear. Res.

    (2001)
  • P.A. Busby et al.

    Gap detection by early-deafened cochlear-implant subjects

    J. Acoust. Soc. Am.

    (1999)
  • P.A. Busby et al.

    Electrode discrimination by early-deafened subjects using the cochlear limited multiple-electrode cochlear implant

    Ear Hear.

    (2000)
  • P.A. Busby et al.

    Dual electrode stimulation using the nucleus CI24RE cochlear implant: electrode impedance and pitch ranking studies

    Ear Hear.

    (2005)
  • P.A. Busby et al.

    Psychophysical studies using a multiple-electrode cochlear implant in patients who were deafened early in life

    Audiology

    (1992)
  • P.A. Busby et al.

    Electrode position, repetition rate, and speech perception by early- and late-deafened cochlear implant patients

    J. Acoust. Soc. Am.

    (1993)
  • P. Dallos et al.

    Properties of auditory nerve responses in absence of outer hair cells

    J. Neurophysiol.

    (1978)
  • P.W. Dawson et al.

    Cochlear implants in children, adolescents, and prelinguistically deafened adults: speech perception

    J. Speech Hear. Res.

    (1992)
  • S.J. Dettman et al.

    Communication development in children who receive the cochlear implant younger than 12 months: risks versus benefits

    Ear Hear.

    (2007)
  • H.R. Dinse et al.

    Optical imaging of cat auditory cortical organization after electrical stimulation of a multichannel cochlear implant: differential effects of acute and chronic stimulation

    Am. J. Otol.

    (1997)
  • R.C. Dowell et al.

    Speech perception in children using cochlear implants: prediction of long-term outcomes

    Cochlear Impl. Int.

    (2002)
  • D.K. Eddington et al.

    Auditory prostheses research with multiple channel intracochlear stimulation in man

    Ann. Otol. Rhinol. Laryngol.

    (1978)
  • J.J. Eggermont et al.

    Auditory-evoked potential studies of cortical maturation in normal hearing and implanted children: correlations with changes in structure and speech perception

    Acta Otolaryngol.

    (2003)
  • Fallon, J.B., Irvine, D.R.F., Coco, A., Donley, L.M., Millard, R.E., Shepherd, R.K., 2007a. Cochlear implantation...
  • Fallon, J.B., Irvine, D.R.F., Coco, A., Donley, L.M., Millard, R.E., Shepherd, R.K., 2007b. Cochlear implantation...
  • E.M. Finney et al.

    Visual stimuli activate auditory cortex in the deaf

    Nat. Neurosci.

    (2001)
  • H. Fryauf-Bertschy et al.

    Cochlear implant use by prelingually deafened children: the influences of age at implant and length of device use

    J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res.

    (1997)
  • Q.J. Fu et al.

    Frequency mapping in cochlear implants

    Ear Hear.

    (2002)
  • B.J. Gantz et al.

    Multivariate predictors of audiological success with multichannel cochlear implants

    Ann. Otol. Rhinol. Laryngol.

    (1993)
  • B.J. Gantz et al.

    Preservation of hearing in cochlear implant surgery: advantages of combined electrical and acoustical speech processing

    Laryngoscope

    (2005)
  • A.L. Giraud et al.

    Imaging plasticity in cochlear implant patients

    Audiol. Neurootol.

    (2001)
  • P.J. Govaerts et al.

    Outcome of cochlear implantation at different ages from 0 to 6 years

    Otol. Neurotol.

    (2002)
  • R. Hari et al.

    Neuromagnetic responses from a deaf subject to stimuli presented through a multichannel cochlear prosthesis

    Ear Hear.

    (1988)
  • B.A. Henry et al.

    The relationship between speech perception and electrode discrimination in cochlear implantees

    J. Acoust. Soc. Am.

    (2000)
  • T.K. Hensch

    Critical period regulation

    Ann. Rev. Neurosci.

    (2004)
  • H. Herzog et al.

    Cortical activation in profoundly deaf patients during cochlear implant stimulation demonstrated by H2(15)O PET

    J. Comput. Assist. Tomogr.

    (1991)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text