ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2025
Infrared light stimulates the cochlea through a mechanical displacement detected and amplified by hair cells.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Toward elucidating the mechanism of cochlear stimulation by infrared light.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- 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
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Although cochlear implants (CI) are the standard of care for profound sensorineural hearing loss they are technically constrained by the tendency of electrical current to spread within the fluid-filled chambers of the cochlea. This limits the resolution of individual electrodes and patients' perceptions of complex sounds. Infrared irradiation has been proposed as an alternative to electrical stimulation because it can elicit auditory responses while being spatially constrained, theoretically promising higher-fidelity hearing for the deaf. However, conflicting reports locate the site of infrared excitation at spiral ganglia neurons or hair cells. We use a combination of genetic, pharmacological, optical, and electrophysiological tools to determine the site of action of infrared irradiation. Infrared-evoked cochlear potentials are composed of two peaks: one driven by hair cells (the microphonic) and a second driven by spiral ganglion neurons (the neural response). Manipulations that prevented hair cell synaptic activity abolished the neural component, while manipulations blocking hair cell mechanotransduction abolished all responses, suggesting a mechanical component to the infrared response. Optical coherence tomography (OCT) confirmed that infrared irradiation creates a mechanical stimulus that is both amplified and detected by hair cells. Because infrared irradiation does not stimulate spiral ganglion neurons directly, it is unlikely to replace the electrical CI.
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.