IUBio Biosequences .. Software .. Molbio soft .. Network News .. FTP

Electric Field Effects in the Brain?

KP-PC k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net%remove%
Mon Apr 28 15:36:55 EST 2003

Acta Otolaryngol 2003 Jan;123(2):148-53 Related Articles, Links

Speech perception after cochlear implantation over a 4-year time

Oh SH, Kim CS, Kang EJ, Lee DS, Lee HJ, Chang SO, Ahn SH, Hwang CH,
Park HJ, Koo JW.

Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Seoul
National University Hospital, Seoul, South Korea.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term speech perception of cochlear
implantees and to compare the developing auditory performance
patterns of prelingual children and postlingual deaf adults. MATERIAL
AND METHODS: Twenty-nine prelingually deaf children and 17
postlingually deaf adults who had been followed up for 4 years were
included in the study. Speech perception ability was assessed by
means of vowel and consonant confusion tests and the Korean version
of the Central Institute of Deafness (K-CID) test (performed without
visual cues). The test results were analyzed at 3 and 6 months after
implantation and then annually. RESULTS: In the prelingually deaf
children, the average results continuously improved over the 4-year
period. In the postlingually deaf adults, the average results did not
improve further after the first 2 years. Individuals with < 5 years
of deafness had a faster rate of recovery of speech perception than
those who had been deaf for > 5 years. The K-CID scores were
negatively correlated with age at implantation for the prelingually
deaf group and with the duration of deafness in the postlingually
deaf group. Children fitted with implants at a younger age showed
better speech perception ability than those fitted with implants at
an older age. Interestingly, prelingually deaf children aged 5-7
years at implantation showed the widest variation in individual
outcomes. Amongst this group of children with highly variable
outcomes, the metabolic status of brain cortices determined by means
of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) was
available for three patients. The individual with the widest
hypometabolic area had the best speech perception ability.
CONCLUSION: The extent of hypometabolism as assessed by FDG-PET
seemed to be one of the major factors predicting the outcome of
cochlear implantation.

PMID: 12701730 [PubMed - in process]

What I'm interested in is an =overview= article. This article
provides useful information with respect to Young\Old relative
plasticity with respect to the impland and with respect to
pre-implant relative "biological mass" [AoK, Ap5], but "4 years" is
insufficient 'time' with respect to which to discern the all that's
entailed with respect to implant ramifications.

I'd be very interested in a careful study that compares implanted
subjects with non-implanted--non-hearing folks =and= 'normal'
[organically-intact] folks, 20-30 years down the road.

If the position I've taken [in this thread and, repeatedly, in former
discussions of this stuff] is correct, then there will be
differential generalized behavioral observables.

Why I'm 'pushing', now, with respect to this stuff is that it's
probably possible, given an awareness of the stuff of the position
I've taken, to provide ongoing 'exercize' [within a therapeutic
setting] that will augment 'normal' plasticity in ways that
compensate with respect to the absence of plasticity that's
introduced by the implants.

Such long-term involvement is only Ethical with respect to any
external 'engineering' that impacts nervous systems - and, through
it, information that's of value to Neuroscience's going forward can
be accumulated.

Anyway, I wish I could hope to live long enough to read these studies
20-30 years hence.

K. P. Collins

"Schmitd! Schmitd! Ve vill build a Shapel!"

"KP-PC" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net%remove%> wrote in message
news:5Yfra.129552$ja4.5647598 at bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
| Hi Richard,
| "r norman" <rsnorman_ at _comcast.net> wrote in message
| news:bbdqav0b6f9jg4q0f092343c4tnie0lm5g at 4ax.com...
| | On Sat, 26 Apr 2003 16:49:15 GMT, "KP-PC"
| | <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net%remove%> wrote:
| | > [...]
| | >"r norman" <rsnorman_ at _comcast.net> wrote in message
| | >news:m07lav4v8sn776q16k86qhjsm1k5k9fcn5 at 4ax.com...
| | >| On 26 Apr 2003 07:10:09 -0700, y.k.y at lycos.com (yan king yin)
| | >wrote:
| | >| [...]
| |
| | You are right about both the long-term problems with
| | implanted electodes and the lack of plasticity.
| | [...]
| I'm curious. Does anyone know, off hand, if there have been any
| long-term studies looking for 'side-effects' with respect to
| implants?
| ken

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net