ArticleLasers in surgery and medicine2021
Channel Interaction During Infrared Light Stimulation in the Cochlea.
Article in Lasers in surgery and medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Infrared light stimulates the cochlea through a mechanical displacement detected and amplified by hair cells.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Study on Recovery Strategy of Hearing Loss & SGN Regeneration Under Physical Regulation.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Review
- Blue Light-Induced, Dosed Protein Expression of Active BDNF in Human Cells Using the Optogenetic CRY2/CIB System.Biotechnology journal · 2024Article
- Emerging trends in the development of flexible optrode arrays for electrophysiology.APL bioengineering · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesThe number of perceptually independent channels to encode acoustic information is limited in contemporary cochlear implants (CIs) because of the current spread in the tissue. It has been suggested that neighboring electrodes have to be separated in humans by a distance of more than 2 mm to eliminate significant overlap of the electric current fields and subsequent interaction between the channels. It has also been argued that an increase in the number of independent channels could improve CI user performance in challenging listening environments, such as speech in noise, tonal languages, or music perception. Optical stimulation has been suggested as an alternative modality for neural stimulation because it is spatially selective. This study reports the results of experiments designed to quantify the interaction between neighboring optical sources in the cochlea during stimulation with infrared radiation. STUDY DESIGN/MATERIALS AND
methodsIn seven adult albino guinea pigs, a forward masking method was used to quantify the interaction between two neighboring optical sources during stimulation. Two optical fibers were placed through cochleostomies into the scala tympani of the basal cochlear turn. The radiation beams were directed towards different neuron populations along the spiral ganglion. Optically evoked compound action potentials were recorded for different radiant energies and distances between the optical fibers. The outcome measure was the radiant energy of a masker pulse delivered 3 milliseconds before a probe pulse to reduce the response evoked by the probe pulse by 3 dB. Results were compared for different distances between the fibers placed along the cochlea.
resultsThe energy required to reduce the probe's response by 3 dB increased by 20.4 dB/mm and by 26.0 dB/octave. The inhibition was symmetrical for the masker placed basal to the probe (base-to-apex) and the masker placed apical to the probe (apex-to-base).
conclusionThe interaction between neighboring optical sources during infrared laser stimulation is less than the interaction between neighboring electrical contacts during electrical stimulation. Previously published data for electrical stimulation reported an average current spread in human and cat cochleae of 2.8 dB/mm. With the increased number of independent channels for optical stimulation, it is anticipated that speech and music performance will improve. Lasers Surg. Med. © 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.