ORIGINAL ARTICLE
FUNCTIONAL MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING OF AUDITORY CORTEX IN PARTIAL DEAFNESS TREATMENT
Henryk Skarzynski 1, 2
,  
Tomasz Wolak 1, 2  
,  
Agnieszka Pluta 1, 2
,  
Monika Lewandowska 1, 2
,  
Mateusz Rusiniak 1, 2
,  
Artur Lorens 1, 2
,  
Lech Sliwa 1, 2
,  
 
 
More details
Hide details
1
Institute of Physiology and Pathology of Hearing, ul. Zgrupowania AK “Kampinos” 1, 01-943 Warszawa, Poland
2
World Hearing Center, ul. Mokra 17, Kajetany 05-830 Nadarzyn, Poland
3
Institute of Sensory Organs, ul. Mokra 1, Kajetany 05-830 Nadarzyn, Poland
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Tomasz Wolak   

Tomasz Wolak, e-mail: t.wolak@ifps.org.pl, Agnieszka Pluta, e-mail: a.pluta@ifps.org.pl
Publication date: 2020-04-20
 
J Hear Sci 2012;2(2):53–60
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
Background:
Recently, there has been a surge of interest in neuroimaging techniques that might help to objectively evaluate the residual hearing abilities of patients with hearing abilities of patients considered for partial deafness treatment (PDT). Such an evaluation might allow a wider range of PD candidates to benefit from cochlear implantation (CI). Although existing studies suggest that functional magnetic resonance (fMRI) may help predict the benefits of CI for hearing-impaired patients, little is known about the activity of the primary auditory cortex in patients with partial deafness. This study is the first to apply fMRI to examine BOLD signal changes in the auditory cortex induced by chirp stimulation in patients with partial deafness

Material and Method:
Ten patients considered for partial deafness treatment with electro-acoustic stimulation (PDT-EAS) and 10 patients considered for electrical complement treatment (PDT-EC) according to Skarżyński’s categorization of partial deafness treatment (PDT) participated in the study. fMRI measurements were performed in a 3T Siemens Magnetom Trio scanner at the Bioimaging Research Center (BRC) of the Institute of Physiology and Pathology of Hearing in Kajetany, Poland. During the fMRI study, subjects were presented with a chirp of two different bandwidths: 50–950 Hz (middle frequency 500 Hz) and 3000–5000 Hz (middle frequency 4000 Hz) at 90 dB(C) via MRI-compatible earphones. A sparse paradigm was used and the data was analyzed using the SPM8 package (Statistical Parametric Mapping, http://www.fil.ion.ucl.ac.uk/spm/). Standard preprocessing was followed by a second-level analysis for contrast of low and high frequencies.

Results:
As expected, bilateral activation in the auditory cortex was observed in response to stimulation by 500 Hz chirps in PDT-EAS and PDT-EC candidates. Activation in response to 4000 Hz chirps were found only in the PDT-EAS group but less strongly than for 500 Hz chirps.

Conclusions:
fMRI can be used as an objective way of assessing residual hearing in the auditory cortex of patients with partial deafness.

 
REFERENCES (18)
1.
Djourno A, Eyries C: Prothese Auditive par Excitation Electrique a Distance du Nerf Sensoriel a Laide dun Bobinage Inclus a Demeure. Presse Med, 1957; 65: 1417–17.
 
2.
House WF: Cochlear Implants. Ann Oto Rhinol Laryn, 1976; 85: 3–93.
 
3.
House W: Cochlear Implants – Past, Present and Future. Cochlear Implants: New Perspectives, 1993; 48: 1–3.
 
4.
Mills M: Hearing Aids and the History of Electronics Miniaturization. Ieee Ann Hist Comput, 2011; 33: 24–44.
 
5.
Skarzynski H, Lorens A, Piotrowska A: A new method of partial deafness treatment. Med Sci Monit, 2003; 9(4): CS20–24.
 
6.
Skarzynski H, Lorens A, Piotrowska A, Anderson I: Partial deafness cochlear implantation provides benefit to a new population of individuals with hearing loss. Acta Otolaryngol, 2006; 126: 934–40.
 
7.
Skarzynski H, Lorens A, Piotrowska A, Podskarbi-Fayette R: Results of Partial Deafness Cochlear Implantation Using Various Electrode Designs. Audiol Neuro-otol, 2009; 14: 39–45.
 
8.
Skarzynski H, Lorens A, Matusiak M et al: Partial Deafness Treatment with the Nucleus Straight Research Array Cochlear Implant. Audiol Neurotol, 2012; 17: 82–91.
 
9.
Skarzynski H, Lorens A, Piotrowska A, Skarzynski PH: Hearing preservation in partial deafness treatment. Med Sci Monit, 2010; 16(11): CR555–62.
 
10.
Skarzynski H, Lorens A, Zgoda M et al: Atraumatic round window deep insertion of cochlear electrodes. Acta Oto-Laryngol, 2011; 131: 740–49.
 
11.
Lee H-J, Kang E, Oh S-H et al: Preoperative differences of cerebral metabolism relate to the outcome of cochlear implants in congenitally deaf children. Hear Res, 2005; 203: 2–9.
 
12.
Lee DS, Lee JS, Oh SH et al: Deafness: Cross-modal plasticity and cochlear implants. Nature, 2001; 409: 149–50.
 
13.
Lee H-J, Giraud A-L, Kang E et al: Cortical Activity at Rest Predicts Cochlear Implantation Outcome. Cereb Cortex, 2007; 17: 909–17.
 
14.
Schmidt AM, Weber BP, Vahid M et al: Functional MR Imaging of the Auditory Cortex with Electrical Stimulation of the Promontory in 35 Deaf Patients Before Cochlea Implantation. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol, 2003; 24: 201–7.
 
15.
Patel AM, Cahill LD, Ret J et al: Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Hearing-Impaired Children Under Sedation Before Cochlear Implantation. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 2007; 133: 677–83.
 
16.
Lazard DS, Lee HJ, Gaebler M et al: Phonological processing in post-lingual deafness and cochlear implant outcome. NeuroImage, 2010; 49: 3443–51.
 
17.
Lambertz N, Gizewski ER, de Greiff A, Forsting M: Crossmodal plasticity in deaf subjects dependent on the extent of hearing loss. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res, 2005; 25: 884–90.
 
18.
Holland SK, Choo DI, Ret JK et al: fMRI of severe to profoundly hearing-impaired infants and toddlers under sedation. International Congress Series, 2004; 1273: 383–86.
 
eISSN:2084-3127
ISSN:2083-389X