Data from: A mouse model of cochlear implantation with chronic electric stimulation
Data files
Apr 24, 2019 version files 15.31 GB
-
ABR and DPOAE.xlsx
16.62 KB
-
bjg0070_s2_cochlea_mouse_no wire_MS5-13_80keV_2.5um_recon.zip.001
734 MB
-
bjg0070_s2_cochlea_mouse_no wire_MS5-13_80keV_2.5um_recon.zip.002
673.45 MB
-
bjg0075_s2_cochlea_mouse_no wire_MS5-15_80keV_2.5um_recon.zip.001
734 MB
-
bjg0075_s2_cochlea_mouse_no wire_MS5-15_80keV_2.5um_recon.zip.002
679.33 MB
-
bjg0078_s3_cochlea_mouse_no wire_MS5-19_80keV_2.5um_recon.zip.001
734 MB
-
bjg0078_s3_cochlea_mouse_no wire_MS5-19_80keV_2.5um_recon.zip.002
669.91 MB
-
bjg0079_s3_cochlea_mouse_no wire_MS5-20_80keV_2.5um_recon.zip.001
734 MB
-
bjg0079_s3_cochlea_mouse_no wire_MS5-20_80keV_2.5um_recon.zip.002
662.88 MB
-
bjg0080_s2_cochlea_mouse_no wire_MS5-17_80keV_2.5um_recon.zip
1.38 GB
-
bjg0081_s1_cochlea_mouse_no wire_MS5-16_80keV_2.5um_recon.zip.001
734 MB
-
bjg0081_s1_cochlea_mouse_no wire_MS5-16_80keV_2.5um_recon.zip.002
663.36 MB
-
fibrosis quantification.xlsx
10.80 KB
-
Histology.zip
439.72 MB
-
Impedance and NRT.xlsx
21.08 KB
-
Non-simtulated 3D Xray MS5-2.zip.001
734 MB
-
Non-simtulated 3D Xray MS5-2.zip.002
667.87 MB
-
Non-simtulated 3D Xray MS5-6.zip
1.05 GB
-
Non-simtulated 3D Xray MS5-7.zip
1.31 GB
-
Non-simtulated 3D Xray MS5-8.zip
1.32 GB
-
Non-stimulated 3D Xray MS5-5.zip
1.39 GB
-
Wire breaks.zip
2.59 MB
Abstract
Objectives: Cochlear implants provide an effective treatment option for those with severe hearing loss, including those with preserved low frequency hearing. However, certain issues can reduce implant efficacy including intracochlear tissue response and delayed loss of residual acoustic hearing. We describe a mouse model of cochlear implantation with chronic electric stimulation that can be used to study cochlear implant biology and related pathologies. Methods: Twelve normal hearing adult CBA/J mice underwent unilateral cochlear implantation and were evenly divided into one group receiving electric stimulation and one not. Serial impedance and neural response telemetry (NRT) measurements were made to assess implant functionality. Functionality was defined as having at least one electrode with an impedance 35 kOhms. Mouse cochleae were harvested for histology and 3D X-ray microscopy 21 days post-operatively, or, in case the implant was still functional, at a later time point when the implant failed. A separate experiment measured the hearing preservation rate in 7 adult CBA/J mice undergoing unilateral cochlear implantation with serial auditory brainstem response (ABR) and distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAE). Results: Implants maintained functionality for a mean of 35 days in the non-stimulated group and 19.8 days in the stimulated group. Reliable NRT and behavioral responses to electric stimulation were recorded. A robust intracochlear peri-implant tissue response with neo-ossification was seen in all cochleae. Six of seven mice maintained intact low frequency hearing up to 6 weeks following cochlear implantation. Conclusions: We demonstrate the feasibility of cochlear implantation and behaviorally significant electric stimulation in the mouse, with the potential for hearing preservation. This model may be combined with established mouse models of hearing loss and the large genetic and molecular research toolkit unique to the mouse for mechanistic and therapeutic investigations of cochlear implant biology.