Literature DB >> 32301176

Development and testing of implanted carbon electrodes for electromagnetic field mapping during neuromodulation.

Neeta Ashok Kumar1, Munish Chauhan1, Sri Kirthi Kandala1, Sung-Min Sohn1, Rosalind J Sadleir1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Deep brain stimulation electrodes composed of carbon fibers were tested as a means of administering and imaging magnetic resonance electrical impedance tomography (MREIT) currents. Artifacts and heating properties of custom carbon-fiber deep brain stimulation (DBS) electrodes were compared with those produced with standard DBS electrodes.
METHODS: Electrodes were constructed from multiple strands of 7-μm carbon-fiber stock. The insulated carbon electrodes were matched to DBS electrode diameter and contact areas. Images of DBS and carbon electrodes were collected with and without current flow and were compared in terms of artifact and thermal effects in phantoms or tissue samples in 7T imaging conditions. Effects on magnetic flux density and current density distributions were also assessed.
RESULTS: Carbon electrodes produced magnitude artifacts with smaller FWHM values compared to the magnitude artifacts around DBS electrodes in spin echo and gradient echo imaging protocols. DBS electrodes appeared 269% larger than actual size in gradient echo images, in sharp contrast to the negligible artifact observed in diameter-matched carbon electrodes. As expected, larger temperature changes were observed near DBS electrodes during extended RF excitations compared with carbon electrodes in the same phantom. Magnitudes and distribution of magnetic flux density and current density reconstructions were comparable for carbon and DBS electrodes.
CONCLUSION: Carbon electrodes may offer a safer, MR-compatible method for administering neuromodulation currents. Use of carbon-fiber electrodes should allow imaging of structures close to electrodes, potentially allowing better targeting, electrode position revision, and the facilitation of functional imaging near electrodes during neuromodulation.
© 2020 International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine.

Entities:  

Keywords:  MR image artifact; MR safety; carbon electrodes; deep brain stimulation; magnetic resonance electrical impedance tomography; neuromodulation

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32301176      PMCID: PMC8183461          DOI: 10.1002/mrm.28273

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Magn Reson Med        ISSN: 0740-3194            Impact factor:   4.668


  50 in total

1.  Neurostimulation systems for deep brain stimulation: in vitro evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging-related heating at 1.5 tesla.

Authors:  Ali R Rezai; Daniel Finelli; John A Nyenhuis; Greg Hrdlicka; Jean Tkach; Ashwini Sharan; Paul Rugieri; Paul H Stypulkowski; Frank G Shellock
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 4.813

2.  Modeling the field distribution in deep brain stimulation: the influence of anisotropy of brain tissue.

Authors:  Christian Schmidt; Ursula van Rienen
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2012-03-06       Impact factor: 4.538

3.  Metal artifacts caused by gradient switching.

Authors:  Hansjörg Graf; Günter Steidle; Petros Martirosian; Ulrike A Lauer; Fritz Schick
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 4.668

4.  Artifact properties of carbon nanotube yarn electrode in magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  C Q Jiang; H W Hao; L M Li
Journal:  J Neural Eng       Date:  2013-02-21       Impact factor: 5.379

Review 5.  Deep brain stimulation.

Authors:  Joel S Perlmutter; Jonathan W Mink
Journal:  Annu Rev Neurosci       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 12.449

6.  Heating induced near deep brain stimulation lead electrodes during magnetic resonance imaging with a 3 T transceive volume head coil.

Authors:  Devashish Shrivastava; Aviva Abosch; John Hughes; Ute Goerke; Lance DelaBarre; Rachana Visaria; Noam Harel; J Thomas Vaughan
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2012-08-15       Impact factor: 3.609

Review 7.  Deep brain stimulation.

Authors:  Sorin Breit; Jörg B Schulz; Alim-Louis Benabid
Journal:  Cell Tissue Res       Date:  2004-08-19       Impact factor: 5.249

8.  Rechargeable deep brain stimulation implantable pulse generators in movement disorders: patient satisfaction and conversion parameters.

Authors:  Olga Waln; Joohi Jimenez-Shahed
Journal:  Neuromodulation       Date:  2013-09-24

9.  The Safety of Using Body-Transmit MRI in Patients with Implanted Deep Brain Stimulation Devices.

Authors:  Joshua Kahan; Anastasia Papadaki; Mark White; Laura Mancini; Tarek Yousry; Ludvic Zrinzo; Patricia Limousin; Marwan Hariz; Tom Foltynie; John Thornton
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-06-10       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 10.  Artifacts in magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Katarzyna Krupa; Monika Bekiesińska-Figatowska
Journal:  Pol J Radiol       Date:  2015-02-23
View more
  1 in total

1.  Low frequency conductivity reconstruction based on a single current injection via MREIT.

Authors:  Yizhuang Song; Saurav Z K Sajib; Haiyang Wang; Hyeuknam Kwon; Munish Chauhan; Jin Keun Seo; Rosalind Sadleir
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2020-11-17       Impact factor: 3.609

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.