Collin J Anderson1, Daria Nesterovich Anderson2, Stefan M Pulst3, Christopher R Butson4, Alan D Dorval5. 1. University of Utah Department of Neurology, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. Electronic address: collina@genetics.utah.edu. 2. University of Utah Department of Biomedical Engineering, Salt Lake City, UT, USA; University of Utah Department of Neurosurgery, Salt Lake City, UT, USA; University of Utah Scientific Computing and Imaging Institute, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. 3. University of Utah Department of Neurology, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. 4. University of Utah Department of Neurology, Salt Lake City, UT, USA; University of Utah Department of Biomedical Engineering, Salt Lake City, UT, USA; University of Utah Department of Neurosurgery, Salt Lake City, UT, USA; University of Utah Scientific Computing and Imaging Institute, Salt Lake City, UT, USA; University of Utah Department of Psychiatry, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. 5. University of Utah Department of Biomedical Engineering, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Achieving deep brain stimulation (DBS) dose equivalence is challenging, especially with pulse width tuning and directional contacts. Further, the precise effects of pulse width tuning are unknown, and recent reports of the effects of pulse width tuning on neural selectivity are at odds with classic biophysical studies. METHODS: We created multicompartment neuron models for two axon diameters and used finite element modeling to determine extracellular influence from standard and segmented electrodes. We analyzed axon activation profiles and calculated volumes of tissue activated. RESULTS: We find that long pulse widths focus the stimulation effect on small, nearby fibers, suppressing distant white matter tract activation (responsible for some DBS side effects) and improving battery utilization when equivalent activation is maintained for small axons. Directional leads enable similar benefits to a greater degree. Reexamining previous reports of short pulse stimulation reducing side effects, we explore a possible alternate explanation: non-dose equivalent stimulation may have resulted in reduced spread of neural activation. Finally, using internal capsule avoidance as an example in the context of subthalamic stimulation, we present a patient-specific model to show how long pulse widths could help increase the biophysical therapeutic window. DISCUSSION: We find agreement with classic studies and predict that long pulse widths may focus the stimulation effect on small, nearby fibers and improve power consumption. While future pre-clinical and clinical work is necessary regarding pulse width tuning, it is clear that future studies must ensure dose equivalence, noting that energy- and charge-equivalent amplitudes do not result in equivalent spread of neural activation when changing pulse width.
BACKGROUND: Achieving deep brain stimulation (DBS) dose equivalence is challenging, especially with pulse width tuning and directional contacts. Further, the precise effects of pulse width tuning are unknown, and recent reports of the effects of pulse width tuning on neural selectivity are at odds with classic biophysical studies. METHODS: We created multicompartment neuron models for two axon diameters and used finite element modeling to determine extracellular influence from standard and segmented electrodes. We analyzed axon activation profiles and calculated volumes of tissue activated. RESULTS: We find that long pulse widths focus the stimulation effect on small, nearby fibers, suppressing distant white matter tract activation (responsible for some DBS side effects) and improving battery utilization when equivalent activation is maintained for small axons. Directional leads enable similar benefits to a greater degree. Reexamining previous reports of short pulse stimulation reducing side effects, we explore a possible alternate explanation: non-dose equivalent stimulation may have resulted in reduced spread of neural activation. Finally, using internal capsule avoidance as an example in the context of subthalamic stimulation, we present a patient-specific model to show how long pulse widths could help increase the biophysical therapeutic window. DISCUSSION: We find agreement with classic studies and predict that long pulse widths may focus the stimulation effect on small, nearby fibers and improve power consumption. While future pre-clinical and clinical work is necessary regarding pulse width tuning, it is clear that future studies must ensure dose equivalence, noting that energy- and charge-equivalent amplitudes do not result in equivalent spread of neural activation when changing pulse width.
Authors: H C F Martens; E Toader; M M J Decré; D J Anderson; R Vetter; D R Kipke; Kenneth B Baker; Matthew D Johnson; Jerrold L Vitek Journal: Clin Neurophysiol Date: 2010-08-21 Impact factor: 3.708
Authors: Johannes Vorwerk; Andrea A Brock; Daria N Anderson; John D Rolston; Christopher R Butson Journal: J Neural Eng Date: 2019-11-06 Impact factor: 5.379
Authors: Daria Nesterovich Anderson; Braxton Osting; Johannes Vorwerk; Alan D Dorval; Christopher R Butson Journal: J Neural Eng Date: 2018-04 Impact factor: 5.379
Authors: Daria Nesterovich Anderson; Gordon Duffley; Johannes Vorwerk; Alan D Dorval; Christopher R Butson Journal: J Neural Eng Date: 2018-10-02 Impact factor: 5.379
Authors: Johannes Vorwerk; Andrea A Brock; Daria N Anderson; John D Rolston; Christopher R Butson Journal: J Neural Eng Date: 2019-11-06 Impact factor: 5.379
Authors: Angelique C Paulk; Rina Zelmann; Britni Crocker; Alik S Widge; Darin D Dougherty; Emad N Eskandar; Daniel S Weisholtz; R Mark Richardson; G Rees Cosgrove; Ziv M Williams; Sydney S Cash Journal: Brain Stimul Date: 2022-03-02 Impact factor: 8.955
Authors: Jean-Philippe Lévy; T A Khoa Nguyen; Lenard Lachenmayer; Ines Debove; Gerd Tinkhauser; Katrin Petermann; Alba Segura Amil; Joan Michelis; Michael Schüpbach; Andreas Nowacki; Claudio Pollo Journal: Neuroimage Clin Date: 2020-11-02 Impact factor: 4.881
Authors: Lauren N Miterko; Tao Lin; Joy Zhou; Meike E van der Heijden; Jaclyn Beckinghausen; Joshua J White; Roy V Sillitoe Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2021-02-26 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Daria Nesterovich Anderson; Chantel M Charlebois; Elliot H Smith; Amir M Arain; Tyler S Davis; John D Rolston Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-12-17 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Daria Nesterovich Anderson; Alan D Dorval; John D Rolston; Stefan M Pulst; Collin J Anderson Journal: J Neural Eng Date: 2021-04-06 Impact factor: 5.379
Authors: Brian L Edlow; Leandro R D Sanz; Robert D Stevens; Olivia Gosseries; Len Polizzotto; Nader Pouratian; John D Rolston; Samuel B Snider; Aurore Thibaut Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2021-07-08 Impact factor: 3.210
Authors: Gordon Duffley; Barbara J Lutz; Aniko Szabo; Adrienne Wright; Christopher W Hess; Adolfo Ramirez-Zamora; Pamela Zeilman; Shannon Chiu; Kelly D Foote; Michael S Okun; Christopher R Butson Journal: JAMA Neurol Date: 2021-08-01 Impact factor: 29.907
Authors: Aristide Merola; Alberto Romagnolo; Vibhor Krishna; Srivatsan Pallavaram; Stephen Carcieri; Steven Goetz; George Mandybur; Andrew P Duker; Brian Dalm; John D Rolston; Alfonso Fasano; Leo Verhagen Journal: Neurol Ther Date: 2020-03-09