INTRODUCTION Cross-modal plasticity has been extensively studied in deaf adults with neuroimaging studies, yielding valuable results. A recent study in our laboratory with deaf–blind children found evidence of cross-modal plasticity, revealed in over-representation of median nerve somatosensory evoked potentials (SEP N20) in left hemisphere parietal, temporal and occipital regions. This finding led to asking whether SEP N20 changes are peculiar to deaf–blindness or are also present in sighted deaf children.

OBJECTIVE Assess cross-modal plasticity in deaf child cochlear implant candidates using neurophysiological techniques (visual evoked potentials and median nerve somatosensory evoked potentials).

METHODS Participants were 14 prelingually deaf children assessed in the Cuban Cochlear Implant Program. Flash visual-evoked potentials and SEP N20 were recorded at 19 scalp recording sites. Topographic maps were obtained and compared to those of control group children with normal hearing. Analysis took into account duration of hearing loss.

RESULTS Topographic maps of flash visual-evoked potentials did not show changes in deaf child cochlear implant candidates. However, SEP N20 from right median nerve stimulation did show changes from expansion of cortical activation into the left temporal region in deaf children aged ≥7 years, which was interpreted as neurophysiological evidence of cross-modal plasticity, not previously described for this technique and type of somatosensory stimulus. We interpret this finding as due in part to duration of deafness, particularly related to handedness, since expansion was selective for the left hemisphere in the children, who were all right-handed.

CONCLUSIONS Cortical over-representation of SEP N20 in the left temporal region is interpreted as evidence of cross-modal plasticity that occurs if the deaf child does not receive a cochlear implant early in life—before concluding the critical period of neural development—and relies on sign language for communication.

KEYWORDS Neuroplasticity, somatosensory evoked potentials, visual evoked potentials, cochlear implants, deafness, prelingual deafness, hearing loss, sensorineural hearing loss, neurophysiology, Cuba

INTRODUCTION Studies of neuroplasticity have shown that the brain’s neural networks change in the absence of sensory input such as hearing or vision. However, little is known about what happens when both sensory modalities are lost (deaf-blindness). Hence, this study of cortical reorganization in visually-impaired child cochlear implant (CI) candidates.

OBJECTIVE Assess cross-modal plasticity, specifically cortical reorganization for tactile representation in visually-impaired child CI candidates, through study of topography of somatosensory evoked potentials (SEP).

METHODS From April through September 2005, SEP from median and tibial nerve electrical stimulation were studied in 12 visually-impaired child CI candidates aged 3–15 years and 23 healthy controls. Following placement of 19 recording electrodes using the International 10-20 System , SEP were recorded and then processed. Topographic maps were obtained for SEP N20 (median nerve) and SEP P40 (tibial nerve), permitting assessment of cortical reorganization by comparing visually-impaired, deaf children’s maps with those of healthy children by means of visual inspection and statistical comparison using a permutation test.

RESULTS SEP N20 topography was significantly more extensive in visually-impaired child CI candidates than in healthy children. An asymmetrical pattern occurred from the expansion of hand tactile activation into the temporal and occipital regions in the left hemisphere on right median nerve stimulation. This did not occur for SEP P40 on tibial nerve stimulation (right and left). Magnitude of expanded SEP N20 response was related to severity of visual impairment and longer duration of dual sensory loss.

CONCLUSIONS Changes in SEP N20 topography are evidence of cross-modal plasticity in visually-impaired child CI candidates, appearing to result from a complex interaction between severity of visual impairment and duration of multisensory deprivation.

KEYWORDS Somatosensory evoked potentials, deaf-blind, hearing and vision loss, sensorineural hearing loss, cochlear implants, neuroplasticity, neuroimaging, neurophysiology, fMRI, functional magnetic resonance imaging, positron-emission tomography, PET scan, Cuba

The following erratum has been corrected in all versions of this article.
Page 26, in the legend for Figure 2 (both a and b), the second group label should read: “Hearing & vision loss.”