Deep brain and cortical stimulation for epilepsy

Background : Despite optimal medical treatment, including epilepsy surgery, many epilepsy patients have uncontrolled seizures. In the last decades, interest has grown in invasive intracranial neurostimulation as a treatment for these patients. Intracranial stimulation includes both deep brain stimulation (DBS) (stimulation through depth electrodes) and cortical stimulation (subdural electrodes). Objectives : To assess the efficacy, safety and tolerability of deep brain and cortical stimulation for refractory epilepsy based on randomized controlled trials. Search methods : We searched PubMed (6 August 2013), the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register (31 August 2013), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 7 of 12) and reference lists of retrieved articles. We also contacted device manufacturers and other researchers in the field. No language restrictions were imposed. Selection criteria : Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing deep brain or cortical stimulation to sham stimulation, resective surgery or further treatment with antiepileptic drugs. Data collection and analysis : Four review authors independently selected trials for inclusion. Two review authors independently extracted the relevant data and assessed trial quality and overall quality of evidence. The outcomes investigated were seizure freedom, responder rate, percentage seizure frequency reduction, adverse events, neuropsychological outcome and quality of life. If additional data were needed, the study investigators were contacted. Results were analysed and reported separately for different intracranial targets for reasons of clinical heterogeneity. Main results : Ten RCTs comparing one to three months of intracranial neurostimulation to sham stimulation were identified. One trial was on anterior thalamic DBS (n = 109; 109 treatment periods); two trials on centromedian thalamic DBS (n = 20; 40 treatment periods), but only one of the trials (n = 7; 14 treatment periods) reported sufficient information for inclusion in the quantitative meta-analysis; three trials on cerebellar stimulation (n = 22; 39 treatment periods); three trials on hippocampal DBS (n = 15; 21 treatment periods); and one trial on responsive ictal onset zone stimulation (n = 191; 191 treatment periods). Evidence of selective reporting was present in four trials and the possibility of a carryover effect complicating interpretation of the results could not be excluded in 4 cross-over trials without any washout period. Moderate-quality evidence could not demonstrate statistically or clinically significant changes in the proportion of patients who were seizure-free or experienced a 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency (primary outcome measures) after 1 to 3 months of anterior thalamic DBS in (multi) focal epilepsy, responsive ictal onset zone stimulation in (multi) focal epilepsy patients and hippocampal DBS in (medial) temporal lobe epilepsy. However, a statistically significant reduction in seizure frequency was found for anterior thalamic DBS (-17.4% compared to sham stimulation; 95% confidence interval (CI) -32.1 to -1.0; high-quality evidence), responsive ictal onset zone stimulation (-24.9%; 95% CI -40.1 to 6.0; high-quality evidence)) and hippocampal DBS (-28.1%; 95% CI -34.1 to -22.2; moderate-quality evidence). Both anterior thalamic DBS and responsive ictal onset zone stimulation do not have a clinically meaningful impact on quality life after three months of stimulation (high-quality evidence). Electrode implantation resulted in asymptomatic intracranial haemorrhage in 3% to 4% of the patients included in the two largest trials and 5% to 13% had soft tissue infections; no patient reported permanent symptomatic sequelae. Anterior thalamic DBS was associated with fewer epilepsy-associated injuries (7.4 versus 25.5%; P = 0.01) but higher rates of self-reported depression (14.8 versus 1.8%; P = 0.02) and subjective memory impairment (13.8 versus 1.8%; P = 0.03); there were no significant differences in formal neuropsychological testing results between the groups. Responsive ictal-onset zone stimulation was well tolerated with few side effects but SUDEP rate should be closely monitored in the future (4 per 340 [= 11.8 per 1000] patient-years; literature: 2.2-10 per 1000 patient-years). The limited number of patients preclude firm statements on safety and tolerability of hippocampal DBS. With regards to centromedian thalamic DBS and cerebellar stimulation, no statistically significant effects could be demonstrated but evidence is of only low to very low quality. Authors' conclusions : Only short term RCTs on intracranial neurostimulation for epilepsy are available. Compared to sham stimulation, one to three months of anterior thalamic DBS ((multi) focal epilepsy), responsive ictal onset zone stimulation ((multi) focal epilepsy) and hippocampal DBS (temporal lobe epilepsy) moderately reduce seizure frequency in refractory epilepsy patients. Anterior thalamic DBS is associated with higher rates of self-reported depression and subjective memory impairment. SUDEP rates require careful monitoring in patients undergoing responsive ictal onset zone stimulation. There is insufficient evidence to make firm conclusive statements on the efficacy and safety of hippocampal DBS, centromedian thalamic DBS and cerebellar stimulation. There is a need for more, large and well-designed RCTs to validate and optimize the efficacy and safety of invasive intracranial neurostimulation treatments

Implantable Micro-Device for Epilepsy Seizure Detection and Subsequent Treatment

RÉSUMÉ L’émergence des micro-dispositifs implantables est une voie prometteuse pour le traitement de troubles neurologiques. Ces systèmes biomédicaux ont été exploités comme traitements non-conventionnels sur des patients chez qui les remèdes habituels sont inefficaces. Les récents progrès qui ont été faits sur les interfaces neuronales directes ont permis aux chercheurs d’analyser l’activité EEG intracérébrale (icEEG) en temps réel pour des fins de traitements. Cette thèse présente un dispositif implantable à base de microsystèmes pouvant capter efficacement des signaux neuronaux, détecter des crises d’épilepsie et y apporter un traitement afin de l’arrêter. Les contributions principales présentées ici ont été rapportées dans cinq articles scientifiques, publiés ou acceptés pour publication dans les revues IEEE, et plusieurs autres tels que «Low Power Electronics» et «Emerging Technologies in Computing». Le microsystème proposé inclus un circuit intégré (CI) à faible consommation énergétique permettant la détection de crises d’épilepsie en temps réel. Cet CI comporte une pré-amplification initiale et un détecteur de crises d’épilepsie. Le pré-amplificateur est constitué d’une nouvelle topologie de stabilisateur d’hacheur réduisant le bruit et la puissance dissipée. Les CI fabriqués ont été testés sur des enregistrements d’icEEG provenant de sept patients épileptiques réfractaires au traitement antiépileptique. Le délai moyen de la détection d’une crise est de 13,5 secondes, soit avant le début des manifestations cliniques évidentes. La consommation totale d’énergie mesurée de cette puce est de 51 μW. Un neurostimulateur à boucle fermée (NSBF), quant à lui, détecte automatiquement les crises en se basant sur les signaux icEEG captés par des électrodes intracrâniennes et permet une rétroaction par une stimulation électrique au même endroit afin d’interrompre ces crises. La puce de détection de crises et le stimulateur électrique à base sur FPGA ont été assemblés à des électrodes afin de compléter la prothèse proposée. Ce NSBF a été validé en utilisant des enregistrements d’icEEG de dix patients souffrant d’épilepsie réfractaire. Les résultats révèlent une performance excellente pour la détection précoce de crises et pour l’auto-déclenchement subséquent d’une stimulation électrique. La consommation énergétique totale du NSBF est de 16 mW. Une autre alternative à la stimulation électrique est l’injection locale de médicaments, un traitement prometteur de l’épilepsie. Un système local de livraison de médicament basé sur un nouveau détecteur asynchrone des crises est présenté.----------ABSTRACT Emerging implantable microdevices hold great promise for the treatment of patients with neurological conditions. These biomedical systems have been exploited as unconventional treatment for the conventionally untreatable patients. Recent progress in brain-machine-interface activities has led the researchers to analyze the intracerebral EEG (icEEG) recording in real-time and deliver subsequent treatments. We present in this thesis a long-term safe and reliable low-power microsystem-based implantable device to perform efficient neural signal recording, seizure detection and subsequent treatment for epilepsy. The main contributions presented in this thesis are reported in five journal manuscripts, published or accepted for publication in IEEE Journals, and many others such as Low Power Electronics, and Emerging Technologies in Computing. The proposed microsystem includes a low-power integrated circuit (IC) intended for real-time epileptic seizure detection. This IC integrates a front-end preamplifier and epileptic seizure detector. The preamplifier is based on a new chopper stabilizer topology that reduces noise and power dissipation. The fabricated IC was tested using icEEG recordings from seven patients with drug-resistant epilepsy. The average seizure detection delay was 13.5 sec, well before the onset of clinical manifestations. The measured total power consumption of this chip is 51 µW. A closed-loop neurostimulator (CLNS) is next introduced, which is dedicated to automatically detect seizure based on icEEG recordings from intracranial electrode contacts and provide an electrical stimulation feedback to the same contacts in order to disrupt these seizures. The seizure detector chip and a dedicated FPGA-based electrical stimulator were assembled together with common recording electrodes to complete the proposed prosthesis. This CLNS was validated offline using recording from ten patients with refractory epilepsy, and showed excellent performance for early detection of seizures and subsequent self-triggering electrical stimulation. Total power consumption of the CLNS is 16 mW. Alternatively, focal drug injection is the promising treatment for epilepsy. A responsive focal drug delivery system based on a new asynchronous seizure detector is also presented. The later system with data-dependent computation reduces up to 49% power consumption compared to the previous synchronous neurostimulator

Advances in closed-loop deep brain stimulation devices

BACKGROUND: Millions of patients around the world are affected by neurological and psychiatric disorders. Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is a device-based therapy that could have fewer side-effects and higher efficiencies in drug-resistant patients compared to other therapeutic options such as pharmacological approaches. Thus far, several efforts have been made to incorporate a feedback loop into DBS devices to make them operate in a closed-loop manner. METHODS: This paper presents a comprehensive investigation into the existing research-based and commercial closed-loop DBS devices. It describes a brief history of closed-loop DBS techniques, biomarkers and algorithms used for closing the feedback loop, components of the current research-based and commercial closed-loop DBS devices, and advancements and challenges in this field of research. This review also includes a comparison of the closed-loop DBS devices and provides the future directions of this area of research. RESULTS: Although we are in the early stages of the closed-loop DBS approach, there have been fruitful efforts in design and development of closed-loop DBS devices. To date, only one commercial closed-loop DBS device has been manufactured. However, this system does not have an intelligent and patient dependent control algorithm. A closed-loop DBS device requires a control algorithm to learn and optimize the stimulation parameters according to the brain clinical state. CONCLUSIONS: The promising clinical effects of open-loop DBS have been demonstrated, indicating DBS as a pioneer technology and treatment option to serve neurological patients. However, like other commercial devices, DBS needs to be automated and modernized

Seizure Detection, Seizure Prediction, and Closed-Loop Warning Systems in Epilepsy

Nearly one-third of patients with epilepsy continue to have seizures despite optimal medication management. Systems employed to detect seizures may have the potential to improve outcomes in these patients by allowing more tailored therapies and might, additionally, have a role in accident and SUDEP prevention. Automated seizure detection and prediction require algorithms which employ feature computation and subsequent classification. Over the last few decades, methods have been developed to detect seizures utilizing scalp and intracranial EEG, electrocardiography, accelerometry and motion sensors, electrodermal activity, and audio/video captures. To date, it is unclear which combination of detection technologies yields the best results, and approaches may ultimately need to be individualized. This review presents an overview of seizure detection and related prediction methods and discusses their potential uses in closed-loop warning systems in epilepsy

Deep brain and cortical stimulation for epilepsy

Background : Despite optimal medical treatment, including epilepsy surgery, many epilepsy patients have uncontrolled seizures. Since the 1970s interest has grown in invasive intracranial neurostimulation as a treatment for these patients. Intracranial stimulation includes both deep brain stimulation (DBS) (stimulation through depth electrodes) and cortical stimulation (subdural electrodes). This is an updated version of a previous Cochrane review published in 2014. Objectives : To assess the efficacy, safety and tolerability of DBS and cortical stimulation for refractory epilepsy based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Search methods : We searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register on 29 September 2015, but it was not necessary to update this search, because records in the Specialized Register are included in CENTRAL. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library 2016, Issue 11, 5 November 2016), PubMed (5 November 2016), ClinicalTrials. gov (5 November 2016), the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform ICTRP (5 November 2016) and reference lists of retrieved articles. We also contacted device manufacturers and other researchers in the field. No language restrictions were imposed. Selection criteria : RCTs comparing deep brain or cortical stimulation versus sham stimulation, resective surgery, further treatment with antiepileptic drugs or other neurostimulation treatments (including vagus nerve stimulation). Data collection and analysis : Four review authors independently selected trials for inclusion. Two review authors independently extracted the relevant data and assessed trial quality and overall quality of evidence. The outcomes investigated were seizure freedom, responder rate, percentage seizure frequency reduction, adverse events, neuropsychological outcome and quality of life. If additional data were needed, the study investigators were contacted. Results were analysed and reported separately for different intracranial targets for reasons of clinical heterogeneity. Main results : Twelve RCTs were identified, eleven of these compared one to three months of intracranial neurostimulation with sham stimulation. One trial was on anterior thalamic DBS (n = 109; 109 treatment periods); two trials on centromedian thalamic DBS (n = 20; 40 treatment periods), but only one of the trials (n = 7; 14 treatment periods) reported sufficient information for inclusion in the quantitative meta-analysis; three trials on cerebellar stimulation (n = 22; 39 treatment periods); three trials on hippocampal DBS (n = 15; 21 treatment periods); one trial on nucleus accumbens DBS (n = 4; 8 treatment periods); and one trial on responsive ictal onset zone stimulation (n = 191; 191 treatment periods). In addition, one small RCT (n = 6) compared six months of hippocampal DBS versus sham stimulation. Evidence of selective reporting was present in four trials and the possibility of a carryover effect complicating interpretation of the results could not be excluded in five cross-over trials without any or a sufficient washout period. Moderate-quality evidence could not demonstrate statistically or clinically significant changes in the proportion of patients who were seizure-free or experienced a 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency (primary outcome measures) after one to three months of anterior thalamic DBS in (multi) focal epilepsy, responsive ictal onset zone stimulation in (multi) focal epilepsy patients and hippocampal DBS in (medial) temporal lobe epilepsy. However, a statistically significant reduction in seizure frequency was found for anterior thalamic DBS (mean difference (MD), -17.4% compared to sham stimulation; 95% confidence interval (CI) -31.2 to -1.0; high-quality evidence), responsive ictal onset zone stimulation (MD -24.9%; 95% CI -40.1 to -6.0; high-quality evidence) and hippocampal DBS (MD -28.1%; 95% CI -34.1 to -22.2; moderate-quality evidence). Both anterior thalamic DBS and responsive ictal onset zone stimulation do not have a clinically meaningful impact on quality life after three months of stimulation (high-quality evidence). Electrode implantation resulted in postoperative asymptomatic intracranial haemorrhage in 1.6% to 3.7% of the patients included in the two largest trials and 2.0% to 4.5% had postoperative soft tissue infections (9.4% to 12.7% after five years); no patient reported permanent symptomatic sequelae. Anterior thalamic DBS was associated with fewer epilepsy-associated injuries (7.4 versus 25.5%; P = 0.01) but higher rates of self-reported depression (14.8 versus 1.8%; P = 0.02) and subjective memory impairment (13.8 versus 1.8%; P = 0.03); there were no significant differences in formal neuropsychological testing results between the groups. Responsive ictal-onset zone stimulation seemed to be well-tolerated with few side effects. The limited number of patients preclude firm statements on safety and tolerability of hippocampal DBS. With regards to centromedian thalamic DBS, nucleus accumbens DBS and cerebellar stimulation, no statistically significant effects could be demonstrated but evidence is of only low to very low quality. Authors' conclusions : Except for one very small RCT, only short-term RCTs on intracranial neurostimulation for epilepsy are available. Compared to sham stimulation, one to three months of anterior thalamic DBS ((multi) focal epilepsy), responsive ictal onset zone stimulation ((multi) focal epilepsy) and hippocampal DBS (temporal lobe epilepsy) moderately reduce seizure frequency in refractory epilepsy patients. Anterior thalamic DBS is associated with higher rates of self-reported depression and subjective memory impairment. There is insufficient evidence to make firm conclusive statements on the efficacy and safety of hippocampal DBS, centromedian thalamic DBS, nucleus accumbens DBS and cerebellar stimulation. There is a need for more, large and well-designed RCTs to validate and optimize the efficacy and safety of invasive intracranial neurostimulation treatments

VLSI Circuits for Bidirectional Neural Interfaces

Medical devices that deliver electrical stimulation to neural tissue are important clinical tools that can augment or replace pharmacological therapies. The success of such devices has led to an explosion of interest in the field, termed neuromodulation, with a diverse set of disorders being targeted for device-based treatment. Nevertheless, a large degree of uncertainty surrounds how and why these devices are effective. This uncertainty limits the ability to optimize therapy and gives rise to deleterious side effects. An emerging approach to improve neuromodulation efficacy and to better understand its mechanisms is to record bioelectric activity during stimulation. Understanding how stimulation affects electrophysiology can provide insights into disease, and also provides a feedback signal to autonomously tune stimulation parameters to improve efficacy or decrease side-effects. The aims of this work were taken up to advance the state-of-the-art in neuro-interface technology to enable closed-loop neuromodulation therapies. Long term monitoring of neuronal activity in awake and behaving subjects can provide critical insights into brain dynamics that can inform system-level design of closed-loop neuromodulation systems. Thus, first we designed a system that wirelessly telemetered electrocorticography signals from awake-behaving rats. We hypothesized that such a system could be useful for detecting sporadic but clinically relevant electrophysiological events. In an 18-hour, overnight recording, seizure activity was detected in a pre-clinical rodent model of global ischemic brain injury. We subsequently turned to the design of neurostimulation circuits. Three critical features of neurostimulation devices are safety, programmability, and specificity. We conceived and implemented a neurostimulator architecture that utilizes a compact on-chip circuit for charge balancing (safety), digital-to-analog converter calibration (programmability) and current steering (specificity). Charge balancing accuracy was measured at better than 0.3%, the digital-to-analog converters achieved 8-bit resolution, and physiological effects of current steering stimulation were demonstrated in an anesthetized rat. Lastly, to implement a bidirectional neural interface, both the recording and stimulation circuits were fabricated on a single chip. In doing so, we implemented a low noise, ultra-low power recording front end with a high dynamic range. The recording circuits achieved a signal-to-noise ratio of 58 dB and a spurious-free dynamic range of better than 70 dB, while consuming 5.5 μW per channel. We demonstrated bidirectional operation of the chip by recording cardiac modulation induced through vagus nerve stimulation, and demonstrated closed-loop control of cardiac rhythm

Experimental treatment options in absence epilepsy

Contains fulltext : 182124.pdf (preprint version ) (Open Access)Background: The benign character of absence epilepsy compared to other genetic generalized epilepsy syndromes has often hampered the search for new treatment options. Absence epilepsy is most often treated with ethosuximide or valproic acid. However, both drugs are not always well tolerated or fail, and seizure freedom for a larger proportion of patients remains to be achieved. The availability of genuine animal models of epilepsy does allow to search for new treatment options not only for absence epilepsy perse but also for other genetic - previously called idiopathic - forms of epilepsy. The recent discovery of a highly excitable cortical zone in these models is considered as a new therapeutic target area. Methods: Here, we provide an overview regarding the search for new therapeutical options as has been investigated in the genetic rodent models (mainly WAG/Rij and GAERS) including drugs and whether antiepileptogenesis can be achieved, various types of electrical and optogenetical invasive stimulations, different types of non-invasive stimulation and finally whether absence seizures can be predicted and prevented. Results: Many factors determine either the cortical and or thalamic excitability or the interaction between cortex and thalamus and offer new possibilities for new anti-absence drugs, among others metabotropic glutamatergic positive and negative allosteric modulators. The inhibition of epileptogenesis by various drugs with its widespread consequences seems feasible, although its mechanisms remain obscure and seems different from the anti-absence action. Surgical intervention on the cortical zone initiating seizures, either with radiosurgery using synchrotron-generated microbeams, or ablation techniques might reduce spike-and-wave discharges in the rodent models. High frequency electrical subcortical or cortical stimulation might be a good way to abort ongoing spike-and-wave discharges. In addition, possibilities for prevention with real-time EEG analyses in combination with electrical stimulation could also be a way to fully control these seizures. Conclusion: Although it is obvious that some of these treatment possibilities will not be used for absence epilepsy and/or need to be further developed, all can be considered as proof of principle and provide clear directives for further developments

An Energy Efficient non-volatile FPGA Digital Processor for Brain Neuromodulation

PhD ThesisBrain stimulation technologies have the potential to provide considerable clinical benefits for people with a range of neurological disorders. Recent neuroscience studies have shown that considerable information of brain states is contained in the low frequency local field potential (If-LFP; below 5Hz) recordings with application in real-time closed-loop neurostimulation for treating neurological disorders. Given these signals can be sampled at low sampling rate and hence provide sparse data streams, there is an opportunity to design implantable neuroprosthesis with long battery lifecycles which enables enough processing power to implement long-term, real-time closed loop control algorithms. In this thesis, a closed-loop embedded digital processor has been created for use in rodent neuroscience experiments. The first contribution of this work is to develop a mathematical analytical design approach of feedback controller for suppressing high-amplitude epileptic activity in the neuron mass model to form a better understanding of how to perform a better closed-loop stimulation to control seizures. The second contribution and the third contribution are combined to present an exploratory energy-efficient digital processor architecture built with commercial off-the-shelf non-volatile FPGAs and microcontroller for sparse data processing of brain neuromodulation. A digital hardware design of an exemplar PID control algorithm has been implemented on this proposed digital architecture. A new power computing diagram of this time-driven approach significantly reduced the power consumption which suggests that a digital combined control system of non-volatile FPGAs and microcontroller outweighs a digital control system of microcontroller with microcontroller regarding computing time cost and energy consumption supposing one microcontroller is always required. Taken together, this digital energy-efficient processor architecture gives important insights and viewpoints for the further advancements of neuroprosthesis for brain neurostimulation to achieve lower power consumption for sparse sampling data rate