Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20830761›Full record

ArticleThe Laryngoscope2010

Laser stimulation of single auditory nerve fibers.

Philip D Littlefield, Irena Vujanovic, Jagmeet Mundi, Agnella Izzo Matic, Claus-Peter Richter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Laryngoscope, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Efferent Inputs Are Required for Normal Function of Vestibular Nerve Afferents.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2019
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. European journal of translational myology · 2016
    Article
  11. Article
  12. On the Horizon: Cochlear Implant Technology.Otolaryngologic clinics of North America · 2015
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Philip D LittlefieldDepartment of Surgery, ENT Section, Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Washington, DC 20307-5001, USA.
Irena Vujanovic
Jagmeet Mundi
Agnella Izzo Matic
Claus-Peter Richter

Funding

High resolution mapping of the Cochlear nerve using optical stimulationR41DC008515 · NIDCD · LOCKHEED MARTIN ACULIGHT CORPORATION · PI BENDETT, MARK P · 2006 to 2006
$202k
Optical stimulation of the auditory nerveF31DC008246 · NIDCD · NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY · PI MATIC, AGNELLA IZZO · 2006 to 2006
$29k
NIDCD NIH HHS F31 DC008246NIDCD NIH HHS F31 DC008246-01NIDCD NIH HHS N01 DC060006NIDCD NIH HHS N01-DC-6-0006NIDCD NIH HHS R41 DC008515NIDCD NIH HHS R41 DC008515-01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectives/hypothesisOne limitation with cochlear implants is the difficulty stimulating spatially discrete spiral ganglion cell groups because of electrode interactions. Multipolar electrodes have improved on this some, but also at the cost of much higher device power consumption. Recently, it has been shown that spatially selective stimulation of the auditory nerve is possible with a mid-infrared laser aimed at the spiral ganglion via the round window. However, these neurons must be driven at adequate rates for optical radiation to be useful in cochlear implants. We herein use single-fiber recordings to characterize the responses of auditory neurons to optical radiation. STUDY

designIn vivo study using normal-hearing adult gerbils.

methodsTwo diode lasers were used for stimulation of the auditory nerve. They operated between 1.844 μm and 1.873 μm, with pulse durations of 35 μs to 1,000 μs, and at repetition rates up to 1,000 pulses per second (pps). The laser outputs were coupled to a 200-μm-diameter optical fiber placed against the round window membrane and oriented toward the spiral ganglion. The auditory nerve was exposed through a craniotomy, and recordings were taken from single fibers during acoustic and laser stimulation.

resultsAction potentials occurred 2.5 ms to 4.0 ms after the laser pulse. The latency jitter was up to 3 ms. Maximum rates of discharge averaged 97 ± 52.5 action potentials per second. The neurons did not strictly respond to the laser at stimulation rates over 100 pps.

conclusionsAuditory neurons can be stimulated by a laser beam passing through the round window membrane and driven at rates sufficient for useful auditory information. Optical stimulation and electrical stimulation have different characteristics; which could be selectively exploited in future cochlear implants.

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantsLasers, SemiconductorAcoustic StimulationAction PotentialsAnimalsCochlear NerveGerbillinaeNerve Fibers

Identifiers

PMID20830761
PMCPMC3411104

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.