4.6 Article

Characterization of cochlear implant artifacts in electrically evoked auditory steady-state responses

Journal

BIOMEDICAL SIGNAL PROCESSING AND CONTROL
Volume 31, Issue -, Pages 127-138

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.bspc.2016.07.013

Keywords

Cochlear implant (CI); CI stimulation artifacts; Electrically evoked auditory steady-state responses (EASSR); Linear interpolation; Monopolar mode stimulation

Funding

  1. FWO [G.066213]
  2. IWT Project [110722]
  3. KU Leuven Research Council [CoE PFV/10/002]
  4. Hermesfonds [141243]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: Electrically evoked auditory steady-state responses (EASSRs) are neural potentials measured in the electroencephalogram (EEG) in response to periodic pulse trains presented, for example, through a cochlear implant (CI). EASSRs could potentially be used for objective CI fitting. However, EEG signals are contaminated with electrical CI artifacts. In this paper, we characterized the CI artifacts for monopolar mode stimulation and evaluated at which pulse rate, linear interpolation over the signal part contaminated with CI artifact is successful. Methods: CI artifacts were characterized by means of their amplitude growth functions and duration. Results: CI artifact durations were between 0.7 and 1.7 ms, at contralateral recording electrodes. At ipsilateral recording electrodes, CI artifact durations are range from 0.7 to larger than 2 ms. Conclusion: At contralateral recording electrodes, the artifact was shorter than the interpulse interval across subjects for 500 pps, which was not always the case for 900 pps. Significance: CI artifact-free EASSRs are crucial for reliable CI fitting and neuroscience research. The CI artifact has been characterized and linear interpolation allows to remove it at contralateral recording electrodes for stimulation at 500 pps. (C) 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available