Dennis A Turner1, Simone Degan2, Francesca Galeffi2, Stephen Schmidt3, Angel V Peterchev4. 1. Neurosurgery, Duke University, USA; Neurobiology, Duke University, USA; Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, USA; Surgery and Research Branches, Durham VAMC, Durham, NC, 27710, USA. Electronic address: dennis.turner@duke.edu. 2. Neurosurgery, Duke University, USA; Surgery and Research Branches, Durham VAMC, Durham, NC, 27710, USA. 3. Neurosurgery, Duke University, USA; Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, USA. 4. Neurosurgery, Duke University, USA; Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Duke University, USA; Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, USA; Electrical & Computer Engineering, Duke University, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Transcranial electrical stimulation at an appropriate dose may demonstrate intracranial effects, including neuronal stimulation and cerebral blood flow responses. OBJECTIVE: We performed in vivo experiments on mouse cortex using transcranial alternating current [AC] stimulation to assess whether cerebral blood flow can be reliably altered by extracranial stimulation. METHODS: We performed transcranial AC electrical stimulation transversely across the closed skull in anesthetized mice, measuring transcranial cerebral blood flow with a laser Doppler probe and intracranial electrical responses as endpoint biomarkers. We calculated a stimulation dose-response function between intracranial electric field and cerebral blood flow. RESULTS: Stimulation at electric field amplitudes of 5-20 mV/mm at 10-20 Hz rapidly increased cerebral blood flow (within 100 ms), which then quickly decreased with no residual effects. The time to peak and blood flow shape varied with stimulation intensity and duration, showing a linear correlation between stimulation dose and peak blood flow increase. Neither afterdischarges nor spreading depression occurred from this level of stimulation. CONCLUSIONS: Extracranial stimulation amplitudes sufficient to evoke reliable blood flow changes require electric field strengths higher than what is tolerable in unanesthetized humans (<1 mV/mm), but less than electroconvulsive therapy levels (>40 mV/mm). However, anesthesia effects, spontaneous blood flow fluctuations, and sampling error may accentuate the apparent field strength needed for enhanced blood flow. The translation to a human dose-response function to augment cerebral blood flow (i.e., in stroke recovery) will require significant modification, potentially to pericranial, focused, multi-electrode application or intracranial stimulation. Published by Elsevier Inc.
BACKGROUND: Transcranial electrical stimulation at an appropriate dose may demonstrate intracranial effects, including neuronal stimulation and cerebral blood flow responses. OBJECTIVE: We performed in vivo experiments on mouse cortex using transcranial alternating current [AC] stimulation to assess whether cerebral blood flow can be reliably altered by extracranial stimulation. METHODS: We performed transcranial AC electrical stimulation transversely across the closed skull in anesthetized mice, measuring transcranial cerebral blood flow with a laser Doppler probe and intracranial electrical responses as endpoint biomarkers. We calculated a stimulation dose-response function between intracranial electric field and cerebral blood flow. RESULTS: Stimulation at electric field amplitudes of 5-20 mV/mm at 10-20 Hz rapidly increased cerebral blood flow (within 100 ms), which then quickly decreased with no residual effects. The time to peak and blood flow shape varied with stimulation intensity and duration, showing a linear correlation between stimulation dose and peak blood flow increase. Neither afterdischarges nor spreading depression occurred from this level of stimulation. CONCLUSIONS: Extracranial stimulation amplitudes sufficient to evoke reliable blood flow changes require electric field strengths higher than what is tolerable in unanesthetized humans (<1 mV/mm), but less than electroconvulsive therapy levels (>40 mV/mm). However, anesthesia effects, spontaneous blood flow fluctuations, and sampling error may accentuate the apparent field strength needed for enhanced blood flow. The translation to a human dose-response function to augment cerebral blood flow (i.e., in stroke recovery) will require significant modification, potentially to pericranial, focused, multi-electrode application or intracranial stimulation. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Entities:
Keywords:
Alzheimer’s disease; Cerebral blood flow; Electric field; Extracranial electrical stimulation; Stroke; Transcranial AC stimulation
Authors: Hannah F Iaccarino; Annabelle C Singer; Anthony J Martorell; Andrii Rudenko; Fan Gao; Tyler Z Gillingham; Hansruedi Mathys; Jinsoo Seo; Oleg Kritskiy; Fatema Abdurrob; Chinnakkaruppan Adaikkan; Rebecca G Canter; Richard Rueda; Emery N Brown; Edward S Boyden; Li-Huei Tsai Journal: Nature Date: 2016-12-07 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: O A Bragina; D A Lara; E M Nemoto; C W Shuttleworth; O V Semyachkina-Glushkovskaya; D E Bragin Journal: Adv Exp Med Biol Date: 2018 Impact factor: 2.622
Authors: Anli Liu; Mihály Vöröslakos; Greg Kronberg; Simon Henin; Matthew R Krause; Yu Huang; Alexander Opitz; Ashesh Mehta; Christopher C Pack; Bart Krekelberg; Antal Berényi; Lucas C Parra; Lucia Melloni; Orrin Devinsky; György Buzsáki Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2018-11-30 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Julia Boonzaier; Geralda A F van Tilborg; Sebastiaan F W Neggers; Rick M Dijkhuizen Journal: Neurorehabil Neural Repair Date: 2018-10-24 Impact factor: 3.919
Authors: Marie Louise Liu; Anke Ninija Karabanov; Marjolein Piek; Esben Thade Petersen; Axel Thielscher; Hartwig Roman Siebner Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-06-10 Impact factor: 4.996
Authors: Giulia Sprugnoli; Fanny Munsch; Davide Cappon; Rachel Paciorek; Joanna Macone; Ann Connor; Georges El Fakhri; Ricardo Salvador; Giulio Ruffini; Kevin Donohoe; Mouhsin M Shafi; Daniel Press; David C Alsop; Alvaro Pascual Leone; Emiliano Santarnecchi Journal: Alzheimers Res Ther Date: 2021-12-20 Impact factor: 8.823