Brain, Vol. 123, No. 7, 1391-1402,
July 2000
© 2000 Oxford University Press
Differential recruitment of the speech processing system in healthy subjects and rehabilitated cochlear implant patients
1 Laboratoire de Neurosciences et Systèmes Sensoriels, CNRS, Hôpital Edouard Herriot, 2 CERMEP, Lyon, France and 3 Wellcome Department of Cognitive Neurology, Institute of Neurology, London, UK
Correspondence to:
Dr Anne-Lise Giraud, Physiologisches Institut III, Universitätsklinikum, Theodor Stern Kai 7, 60590 Frankfurt/Main, Germany E-mail: Giraud{at}em.uni-frankfurt.de
Differences in cerebral activation between control subjects and post-lingually deaf rehabilitated cochlear implant patients were identified with PET under various speech conditions of different linguistic complexity. Despite almost similar performance in patients and controls, different brain activation patterns were elicited. In patients, an attentional network including prefrontal and parietal modality-aspecific attentional regions and subcortical auditory regions was over-activated irrespective of the nature of the speech stimuli and during expectancy of speech stimuli. A left temporoparietal semantic region was responsive to meaningless stimuli (vowels). In response to meaningful stimuli (words, sentences, story), left middle and inferior temporal semantic regions and posterior superior temporal phonological regions were under-activated in patients, whereas anterior superior temporal phonological regions were over-activated. These differences in the recruitment of the speech comprehension system reflect the alternative neural strategies that permit speech comprehension after cochlear implantation.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  K. Strelnikov, J. Rouger, J.-F. Demonet, S. Lagleyre, B. Fraysse, O. Deguine, and P. Barone Does Brain Activity at Rest Reflect Adaptive Strategies? Evidence from Speech Processing after Cochlear Implantation Cereb Cortex, October 5, 2009; (2009) bhp183v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P. Sandmann, T. Eichele, M. Buechler, S. Debener, L. Jancke, N. Dillier, K. Hugdahl, and M. Meyer Evaluation of evoked potentials to dyadic tones after cochlear implantation Brain, July 1, 2009; 132(7): 1967 - 1979. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Coez, M. Zilbovicius, E. Ferrary, D. Bouccara, I. Mosnier, E. Ambert-Dahan, E. Bizaguet, A. Syrota, Y. Samson, and O. Sterkers Cochlear Implant Benefits in Deafness Rehabilitation: PET Study of Temporal Voice Activations J. Nucl. Med., January 1, 2008; 49(1): 60 - 67. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. M. Wilson, I. Molnar-Szakacs, and M. Iacoboni Beyond Superior Temporal Cortex: Intersubject Correlations in Narrative Speech Comprehension Cereb Cortex, January 1, 2008; 18(1): 230 - 242. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
U. Hasson, H. C. Nusbaum, and S. L. Small Brain Networks Subserving the Extraction of Sentence Information and Its Encoding to Memory Cereb Cortex, December 1, 2007; 17(12): 2899 - 2913. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. Rouger, S. Lagleyre, B. Fraysse, S. Deneve, O. Deguine, and P. Barone From the Cover: Evidence that cochlear-implanted deaf patients are better multisensory integrators PNAS, April 24, 2007; 104(17): 7295 - 7300. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H.-J. Lee, A.-L. Giraud, E. Kang, S.-H. Oh, H. Kang, C.-S. Kim, and D. S. Lee Cortical Activity at Rest Predicts Cochlear Implantation Outcome Cereb Cortex, April 1, 2007; 17(4): 909 - 917. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J.-F. Demonet, G. Thierry, and D. Cardebat Renewal of the Neurophysiology of Language: Functional Neuroimaging Physiol Rev, January 1, 2005; 85(1): 49 - 95. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. L. Giraud, C. J. Price, J. M. Graham, and R. S. J. Frackowiak Functional plasticity of language-related brain areas after cochlear implantation Brain, July 1, 2001; 124(7): 1307 - 1316. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|