Literature DB >> 35247646

Local and distant cortical responses to single pulse intracranial stimulation in the human brain are differentially modulated by specific stimulation parameters.

Angelique C Paulk1, Rina Zelmann2, Britni Crocker3, Alik S Widge4, Darin D Dougherty5, Emad N Eskandar6, Daniel S Weisholtz7, R Mark Richardson8, G Rees Cosgrove9, Ziv M Williams8, Sydney S Cash2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Electrical neuromodulation via direct electrical stimulation (DES) is an increasingly common therapy for a wide variety of neuropsychiatric diseases. Unfortunately, therapeutic efficacy is inconsistent, likely due to our limited understanding of the relationship between the massive stimulation parameter space and brain tissue responses.
OBJECTIVE: To better understand how different parameters induce varied neural responses, we systematically examined single pulse-induced cortico-cortico evoked potentials (CCEP) as a function of stimulation amplitude, duration, brain region, and whether grey or white matter was stimulated.
METHODS: We measured voltage peak amplitudes and area under the curve (AUC) of intracranially recorded stimulation responses as a function of distance from the stimulation site, pulse width, current injected, location relative to grey and white matter, and brain region stimulated (N = 52, n = 719 stimulation sites).
RESULTS: Increasing stimulation pulse width increased responses near the stimulation location. Increasing stimulation amplitude (current) increased both evoked amplitudes and AUC nonlinearly. Locally (<15 mm), stimulation at the boundary between grey and white matter induced larger responses. In contrast, for distant sites (>15 mm), white matter stimulation consistently produced larger responses than stimulation in or near grey matter. The stimulation location-response curves followed different trends for cingulate, lateral frontal, and lateral temporal cortical stimulation.
CONCLUSION: These results demonstrate that a stronger local response may require stimulation in the grey-white boundary while stimulation in the white matter could be needed for network activation. Thus, stimulation parameters tailored for a specific anatomical-functional outcome may be key to advancing neuromodulatory therapy.
Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cortex; Human; Intracranial; Nonlinear; Single pulse electrical stimulation; White matter

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35247646      PMCID: PMC8985164          DOI: 10.1016/j.brs.2022.02.017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brain Stimul        ISSN: 1876-4754            Impact factor:   8.955


  116 in total

1.  Local and distant responses to single pulse electrical stimulation reflect different forms of connectivity.

Authors:  Britni Crocker; Lauren Ostrowski; Ziv M Williams; Darin D Dougherty; Emad N Eskandar; Alik S Widge; Catherine J Chu; Sydney S Cash; Angelique C Paulk
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2021-04-30       Impact factor: 6.556

2.  Relations between EEG phenomena and potentials of single cortical cells. I. Evoked responses after thalamic and erpicortical stimulation.

Authors:  O D Creutzfeldt; S Watanabe; H D Lux
Journal:  Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  1966-01

3.  The effects of direct brain stimulation in humans depend on frequency, amplitude, and white-matter proximity.

Authors:  Uma R Mohan; Andrew J Watrous; Jonathan F Miller; Bradley C Lega; Michael R Sperling; Gregory A Worrell; Robert E Gross; Kareem A Zaghloul; Barbara C Jobst; Kathryn A Davis; Sameer A Sheth; Joel M Stein; Sandhitsu R Das; Richard Gorniak; Paul A Wanda; Daniel S Rizzuto; Michael J Kahana; Joshua Jacobs
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2020-05-21       Impact factor: 8.955

4.  Association of Closed-Loop Brain Stimulation Neurophysiological Features With Seizure Control Among Patients With Focal Epilepsy.

Authors:  Vasileios Kokkinos; Nathaniel D Sisterson; Thomas A Wozny; R Mark Richardson
Journal:  JAMA Neurol       Date:  2019-07-01       Impact factor: 18.302

Review 5.  Deep brain stimulation for Parkinson disease: an expert consensus and review of key issues.

Authors:  Jeff M Bronstein; Michele Tagliati; Ron L Alterman; Andres M Lozano; Jens Volkmann; Alessandro Stefani; Fay B Horak; Michael S Okun; Kelly D Foote; Paul Krack; Rajesh Pahwa; Jaimie M Henderson; Marwan I Hariz; Roy A Bakay; Ali Rezai; William J Marks; Elena Moro; Jerrold L Vitek; Frances M Weaver; Robert E Gross; Mahlon R DeLong
Journal:  Arch Neurol       Date:  2010-10-11

6.  Closed-loop enhancement and neural decoding of cognitive control in humans.

Authors:  Sydney S Cash; Alik S Widge; Ishita Basu; Ali Yousefi; Britni Crocker; Rina Zelmann; Angelique C Paulk; Noam Peled; Kristen K Ellard; Daniel S Weisholtz; G Rees Cosgrove; Thilo Deckersbach; Uri T Eden; Emad N Eskandar; Darin D Dougherty
Journal:  Nat Biomed Eng       Date:  2021-11-01       Impact factor: 29.234

Review 7.  Deep Brain Stimulation for Movement Disorders.

Authors:  Maria A Revell
Journal:  Nurs Clin North Am       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 1.208

Review 8.  New Approach for Exploring Cerebral Functional Connectivity: Review of Cortico-cortical Evoked Potential.

Authors:  Takeharu Kunieda; Yukihiro Yamao; Takayuki Kikuchi; Riki Matsumoto
Journal:  Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo)       Date:  2015-04-28       Impact factor: 1.742

9.  Hemispheric Regional Based Analysis of Diffusion Tensor Imaging and Diffusion Tensor Tractography in Patients with Temporal Lobe Epilepsy and Correlation with Patient outcomes.

Authors:  Mahdi Alizadeh; Lauren Kozlowski; Jennifer Muller; Neha Ashraf; Shiva Shahrampour; Feroze B Mohamed; Chengyuan Wu; Ashwini Sharan
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-01-18       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Stimulation artifact correction method for estimation of early cortico-cortical evoked potentials.

Authors:  Lena Trebaul; David Rudrauf; Anne-Sophie Job; Mihai Dragos Mălîia; Irina Popa; Andrei Barborica; Lorella Minotti; Ioana Mîndruţă; Philippe Kahane; Olivier David
Journal:  J Neurosci Methods       Date:  2016-03-04       Impact factor: 2.390

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.