| Literature DB >> 30424443 |
Danesh Ashouri Vajari1,2, Maria Vomero3,4, Johannes B Erhardt5,6, Ali Sadr7, Juan S Ordonez8,9, Volker A Coenen10,11,12, Thomas Stieglitz13,14,15.
Abstract
Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is a successful medical therapy for many treatment resistant neuropsychiatric disorders such as movement disorders; e.g., Parkinson's disease, Tremor, and dystonia. Moreover, DBS is becoming more and more appealing for a rapidly growing number of patients with other neuropsychiatric diseases such as depression and obsessive compulsive disorder. In spite of the promising outcomes, the current clinical hardware used in DBS does not match the technological standards of other medical applications and as a result could possibly lead to side effects such as high energy consumption and others. By implementing more advanced DBS devices, in fact, many of these limitations could be overcome. For example, a higher channels count and smaller electrode sites could allow more focal and tailored stimulation. In addition, new materials, like carbon for example, could be incorporated into the probes to enable adaptive stimulation protocols by biosensing neurotransmitters in the brain. Updating the current clinical DBS technology adequately requires combining the most recent technological advances in the field of neural engineering. Here, a novel hybrid multimodal DBS probe with glassy carbon microelectrodes on a polyimide thin-film device assembled on a silicon rubber tubing is introduced. The glassy carbon interface enables neurotransmitter detection using fast scan cyclic voltammetry and electrophysiological recordings while simultaneously performing electrical stimulation. Additionally, the presented DBS technology shows no imaging artefacts in magnetic resonance imaging. Thus, we present a promising new tool that might lead to a better fundamental understanding of the underlying mechanism of DBS while simultaneously paving our way towards better treatments.Entities:
Keywords: deep brain stimulation; dopamine; fast scan cyclic voltammetry; glassy carbon electrode; magnetic resonance imaging
Year: 2018 PMID: 30424443 PMCID: PMC6215126 DOI: 10.3390/mi9100510
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Micromachines (Basel) ISSN: 2072-666X Impact factor: 2.891
Figure 1Illustration of a deep brain stimulation device implanted in a patient. A deep brain stimulation implant consists of four main components; electrode contacts, lead, lead wire, extension part and the implantable pulse generator (IPG or neurostimulator). A conventional DBS probe is featured with four annular active sites/contacts to deliver electrical current to the target tissue (diagram by D. Ashouri Vajari).
Comparison of the DBS lead parameters.
| Parameter | Conventional DBS 1 | DBS-Array Sapiens 1 | Hybrid Probe |
|---|---|---|---|
| Diameter of the Lead | 1.27 mm | 1.27 mm | 1.19 mm |
| Individual Contact Shape | ring | disc | disc |
| Individual Contact Size | 1.50 mm | 0.50 mm | 50 μm |
| Circumferential Pitch | N.A. | 90° | 90° |
| Total Length of Array | 7.5–10.5 mm | 12.0 mm | 10 mm |
| Total Number of Contacts | 4 | 64 | 16 |
| Biosensing Capability | no | no | yes |
1 Data adapted from [11].
Figure 2Schematic of the hybrid deep brain stimulation (DBS) probe. (a) Thin-film device with glassy carbon (GC) microelectrodes (50 um in diameter) embedded into a polyimide substrate. The active sites are distributed homogeneously along the length of the foil; (b) Cross-sectional view of the interface between the glassy carbon and the metal tracks (c) Assembled hybrid probe showing the spiral design of the wrapped thin-film device shown in (a) around the silicone-rubber tubing (diagram by D. Ashouri Vajari).
Figure 3Schematic of the used waveform for electrical stimulation and for fast scan cyclic voltammetry; (a) Fast scan cyclic voltammetry (FSCV) waveform, the 100 ms delay with the −0.4 V holding potential increases the possibility of accumulation of the dopamine molecules prior each scan, the temporal resolution of the detection system is limited by the delay time between two scans; (b) biphasic, charged balanced, cathodic first waveform used for the pulse test.
Figure 4Representation of the fabricated thin-film device and the assembled hybrid probe; (a) cleanroom fabricated GC thin-film electrode featuring 16 active channels and zero insertion force (ZIF) interconnection in hybrid assembly; (b) a close-up of the thin-film device and the GC sites:, the dark disk-shaped site represent a glassy carbon interface present at the end of the metal tracks; (c) the assembled hybrid DBS probe; (d) a representative image of the electrode surface after wrapping the thin-film device around the silicone rubber tubing—no deformation/delamination on the glassy carbon interface was observed; (e) the hybrid assembly offering a higher stability to the thin-film device by not only introducing more flexibility and also by allowing for stretch without damage.
Figure 5Electrochemical characterization of the fabricated glassy carbon electrodes prior to and after the wrapping: (a) The conducted electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) showing the influence of the wrapping on the performance of the electrodes in comparison to the un-wrapped electrode; (b) The representative CV diagram presenting the resulted characterizations of the thin-film device and hybrid probe.
Figure 6In vitro calibration curves of the conducted FSCV experiments for the thin-film devices as well as the hybrid probes; (a) representative FSCV diagram using thin-film device; (b) representative FSCV diagram of one of the calibrated hybrid probes with the calculated standard deviations; (c) linear fitting of the calibration curve for the thin-film device (n = 3); (d) linear fitting of the calibration values based on the calculated average for the hybrid assembly (with the calculated standard deviations ; n = 6).
Figure 7Comparison of the hybrid probe with a conventional DBS probe with respect to implant localization and imaging artefacts due to the electrode material in common MRI sequences using a 1.5 T scanner; (a) Photograph of the hybrid probe (left) and the conventional 3389 Medtronic® DBS probe (right) in a 1% agarose phantom; (b) Coronal view using a Turbo Spin Echo sequence; (c) Coronal view using an Inversion Recovery sequence; (d) Coronal view using a Gradient Echo sequence; (e) Transversal view along dashed line in (d) using a Gradient Echo sequence; (f) Coronal view using an Echo Planar Imaging sequence. Both devices have a similar diameter range (hybrid probe 1.19 mm; conventional DBS 1.27 mm) the displayed diameter at the tip of the conventional DBS probe, however, appears larger due to susceptibility artefacts.