Literature DB >> 22510375

Recording evoked potentials during deep brain stimulation: development and validation of instrumentation to suppress the stimulus artefact.

A R Kent1, W M Grill.   

Abstract

The clinical efficacy of deep brain stimulation (DBS) for the treatment of movement disorders depends on the identification of appropriate stimulation parameters. Since the mechanisms of action of DBS remain unclear, programming sessions can be time consuming, costly and result in sub-optimal outcomes. Measurement of electrically evoked compound action potentials (ECAPs) during DBS, generated by activated neurons in the vicinity of the stimulating electrode, could offer insight into the type and spatial extent of neural element activation and provide a potential feedback signal for the rational selection of stimulation parameters and closed-loop DBS. However, recording ECAPs presents a significant technical challenge due to the large stimulus artefact, which can saturate recording amplifiers and distort short latency ECAP signals. We developed DBS-ECAP recording instrumentation combining commercial amplifiers and circuit elements in a serial configuration to reduce the stimulus artefact and enable high fidelity recording. We used an electrical circuit equivalent model of the instrumentation to understand better the sources of the stimulus artefact and the mechanisms of artefact reduction by the circuit elements. In vitro testing validated the capability of the instrumentation to suppress the stimulus artefact and increase gain by a factor of 1000 to 5000 compared to a conventional biopotential amplifier. The distortion of mock ECAP (mECAP) signals was measured across stimulation parameters, and the instrumentation enabled high fidelity recording of mECAPs with latencies of only 0.5 ms for DBS pulse widths of 50 to 100 µs/phase. Subsequently, the instrumentation was used to record in vivo ECAPs, without contamination by the stimulus artefact, during thalamic DBS in an anesthetized cat. The characteristics of the physiological ECAP were dependent on stimulation parameters. The novel instrumentation enables high fidelity ECAP recording and advances the potential use of the ECAP as a feedback signal for the tuning of DBS parameters.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22510375      PMCID: PMC3360802          DOI: 10.1088/1741-2560/9/3/036004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neural Eng        ISSN: 1741-2552            Impact factor:   5.379


  51 in total

Review 1.  Which elements are excited in electrical stimulation of mammalian central nervous system: a review.

Authors:  J B Ranck
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  1975-11-21       Impact factor: 3.252

Review 2.  Selection of stimulus parameters for deep brain stimulation.

Authors:  Alexis M Kuncel; Warren M Grill
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 3.708

3.  Electrically evoked whole-nerve action potentials: parametric data from the cat.

Authors:  C J Brown; P J Abbas
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1990-11       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 4.  Dielectric properties of tissues and biological materials: a critical review.

Authors:  K R Foster; H P Schwan
Journal:  Crit Rev Biomed Eng       Date:  1989

5.  Postmortem changes of the dielectric properties of bovine brain tissues at low radiofrequencies.

Authors:  A Surowiec; S S Stuchly; A Swarup
Journal:  Bioelectromagnetics       Date:  1986       Impact factor: 2.010

6.  On the nature and elimination of stimulus artifact in nerve signals evoked and recorded using surface electrodes.

Authors:  K C McGill; K L Cummins; L J Dorfman; B B Berlizot; K Leutkemeyer; D G Nishimura; B Widrow
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  1982-02       Impact factor: 4.538

7.  A sample and hold amplifier system for stimulus artifact suppression.

Authors:  T L Babb; E Mariani; G M Strain; J P Lieb; H V Soper; P H Crandall
Journal:  Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  1978-04

8.  Long-term suppression of tremor by chronic stimulation of the ventral intermediate thalamic nucleus.

Authors:  A L Benabid; P Pollak; C Gervason; D Hoffmann; D M Gao; M Hommel; J E Perret; J de Rougemont
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1991-02-16       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  Modulation of tremor amplitude during deep brain stimulation at different frequencies.

Authors:  Anne Beuter; Michèle S Titcombe
Journal:  Brain Cogn       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 2.310

10.  Acute and long-term effects of subthalamic nucleus stimulation in Parkinson's disease.

Authors:  A L Benabid; P Pollak; C Gross; D Hoffmann; A Benazzouz; D M Gao; A Laurent; M Gentil; J Perret
Journal:  Stereotact Funct Neurosurg       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 1.875

View more
  18 in total

1.  Behavioral assessment of sensitivity to intracortical microstimulation of primate somatosensory cortex.

Authors:  Sungshin Kim; Thierri Callier; Gregg A Tabot; Robert A Gaunt; Francesco V Tenore; Sliman J Bensmaia
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-10-26       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 2.  Evolution of optogenetic microdevices.

Authors:  Rajas P Kale; Abbas Z Kouzani; Ken Walder; Michael Berk; Susannah J Tye
Journal:  Neurophotonics       Date:  2015-06-25       Impact factor: 3.593

3.  Neural origin of evoked potentials during thalamic deep brain stimulation.

Authors:  Alexander R Kent; Warren M Grill
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2013-05-29       Impact factor: 2.714

4.  Measurement of evoked potentials during thalamic deep brain stimulation.

Authors:  Alexander R Kent; Brandon D Swan; David T Brocker; Dennis A Turner; Robert E Gross; Warren M Grill
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2014-10-05       Impact factor: 8.955

5.  The Emerging Role of Biomarkers in Adaptive Modulation of Clinical Brain Stimulation.

Authors:  Kimberly B Hoang; Dennis A Turner
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2019-09-01       Impact factor: 4.654

Review 6.  Future of seizure prediction and intervention: closing the loop.

Authors:  Vivek Nagaraj; Steven T Lee; Esther Krook-Magnuson; Ivan Soltesz; Pascal Benquet; Pedro P Irazoqui; Theoden I Netoff
Journal:  J Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 2.177

7.  Analysis of deep brain stimulation electrode characteristics for neural recording.

Authors:  Alexander R Kent; Warren M Grill
Journal:  J Neural Eng       Date:  2014-06-12       Impact factor: 5.379

8.  Suppression of stimulus artifact contaminating electrically evoked electromyography.

Authors:  Jie Liu; Sheng Li; Xiaoyan Li; Cliff Klein; William Z Rymer; Ping Zhou
Journal:  NeuroRehabilitation       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 2.138

9.  Calcium activation of cortical neurons by continuous electrical stimulation: Frequency dependence, temporal fidelity, and activation density.

Authors:  Nicholas J Michelson; James R Eles; Alberto L Vazquez; Kip A Ludwig; Takashi D Y Kozai
Journal:  J Neurosci Res       Date:  2018-12-26       Impact factor: 4.164

10.  Local field potential recordings in a non-human primate model of Parkinsons disease using the Activa PC + S neurostimulator.

Authors:  Allison T Connolly; Abirami Muralidharan; Claudia Hendrix; Luke Johnson; Rahul Gupta; Scott Stanslaski; Tim Denison; Kenneth B Baker; Jerrold L Vitek; Matthew D Johnson
Journal:  J Neural Eng       Date:  2015-10-15       Impact factor: 5.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.