Teng Wang1, Svein Kleiven2, Xiaogai Li2. 1. Division of Neuronic Engineering, Department of Biomedical Engineering and Health Systems, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Hälsovägen 11C, SE-141 52, Huddinge, Sweden. tenwan@kth.se. 2. Division of Neuronic Engineering, Department of Biomedical Engineering and Health Systems, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Hälsovägen 11C, SE-141 52, Huddinge, Sweden.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hyperosmotic therapy is a mainstay treatment for cerebral edema. Although often effective, its disadvantages include mainly acting on the normal brain region with limited effectiveness in eliminating excess fluid in the edema region. This study investigates how to configure our previously proposed novel electroosmosis based edema treatment as a complement to hyperosmotic therapy. METHODS: Three electrode configurations are designed to drive the excess fluid out of the edema region, including 2-electrode, 3-electrode, and 5-electrode designs. The focality and directionality of the induced electroosmotic flow (EOF) are then investigated using the same patient-specific head model with localized edema. RESULTS: The 5-electrode design shows improved EOF focality with reduced effect on the normal brain region than the other two designs. Importantly, this design also achieves better directionality driving excess edema tissue fluid to a larger region of surrounding normal brain where hyperosmotic therapy functions better. Thus, the 5-electrode design is suggested to treat edema more efficiently via a synergic effect: the excess fluid is first driven out from the edema to surrounding normal brain via EOF, where it can then be treated with hyperosmotic therapy. Meanwhile, the 5-electrode design drives 2.22 mL excess fluid from the edema region in an hour comparable to the other designs, indicating a similar efficiency of EOF. CONCLUSIONS: The results show that the promise of our previously proposed novel electroosmosis based edema treatment can be designed to achieve better focality and directionality towards a complement to hyperosmotic therapy.
BACKGROUND: Hyperosmotic therapy is a mainstay treatment for cerebral edema. Although often effective, its disadvantages include mainly acting on the normal brain region with limited effectiveness in eliminating excess fluid in the edema region. This study investigates how to configure our previously proposed novel electroosmosis based edema treatment as a complement to hyperosmotic therapy. METHODS: Three electrode configurations are designed to drive the excess fluid out of the edema region, including 2-electrode, 3-electrode, and 5-electrode designs. The focality and directionality of the induced electroosmotic flow (EOF) are then investigated using the same patient-specific head model with localized edema. RESULTS: The 5-electrode design shows improved EOF focality with reduced effect on the normal brain region than the other two designs. Importantly, this design also achieves better directionality driving excess edema tissue fluid to a larger region of surrounding normal brain where hyperosmotic therapy functions better. Thus, the 5-electrode design is suggested to treat edema more efficiently via a synergic effect: the excess fluid is first driven out from the edema to surrounding normal brain via EOF, where it can then be treated with hyperosmotic therapy. Meanwhile, the 5-electrode design drives 2.22 mL excess fluid from the edema region in an hour comparable to the other designs, indicating a similar efficiency of EOF. CONCLUSIONS: The results show that the promise of our previously proposed novel electroosmosis based edema treatment can be designed to achieve better focality and directionality towards a complement to hyperosmotic therapy.
Authors: M Akhtari; H C Bryant; A N Mamelak; E R Flynn; L Heller; J J Shih; M Mandelkern; A Matlachov; D M Ranken; E D Best; M A DiMauro; R R Lee; W W Sutherling Journal: Brain Topogr Date: 2002 Impact factor: 3.020
Authors: A Antal; I Alekseichuk; M Bikson; J Brockmöller; A R Brunoni; R Chen; L G Cohen; G Dowthwaite; J Ellrich; A Flöel; F Fregni; M S George; R Hamilton; J Haueisen; C S Herrmann; F C Hummel; J P Lefaucheur; D Liebetanz; C K Loo; C D McCaig; C Miniussi; P C Miranda; V Moliadze; M A Nitsche; R Nowak; F Padberg; A Pascual-Leone; W Poppendieck; A Priori; S Rossi; P M Rossini; J Rothwell; M A Rueger; G Ruffini; K Schellhorn; H R Siebner; Y Ugawa; A Wexler; U Ziemann; M Hallett; W Paulus Journal: Clin Neurophysiol Date: 2017-06-19 Impact factor: 3.708
Authors: Amir H Faraji; Andrea S Jaquins-Gerstl; Alec C Valenta; Yanguang Ou; Stephen G Weber Journal: ACS Chem Neurosci Date: 2020-07-06 Impact factor: 4.418
Authors: Marom Bikson; Pnina Grossman; Chris Thomas; Adantchede Louis Zannou; Jimmy Jiang; Tatheer Adnan; Antonios P Mourdoukoutas; Greg Kronberg; Dennis Truong; Paulo Boggio; André R Brunoni; Leigh Charvet; Felipe Fregni; Brita Fritsch; Bernadette Gillick; Roy H Hamilton; Benjamin M Hampstead; Ryan Jankord; Adam Kirton; Helena Knotkova; David Liebetanz; Anli Liu; Colleen Loo; Michael A Nitsche; Janine Reis; Jessica D Richardson; Alexander Rotenberg; Peter E Turkeltaub; Adam J Woods Journal: Brain Stimul Date: 2016-06-15 Impact factor: 8.955
Authors: María M Adeva; Gema Souto; Cristóbal Donapetry; Manuel Portals; Alberto Rodriguez; David Lamas Journal: Neurochem Int Date: 2012-05-09 Impact factor: 3.921