The safety of transcranial magnetic stimulation with deep brain stimulation instruments

Combining Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Deep Brain Stimulation: Current Knowledge, Relevance and Future Perspectives

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) has emerged as an invasive neuromodulation technique for the treatment of several neurological disorders, but the mechanisms underlying its effects remain partially elusive. In this context, the application of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) in patients treated with DBS represents an intriguing approach to investigate the neurophysiology of cortico-basal networks. Experimental studies combining TMS and DBS that have been performed so far have mainly aimed to evaluate the effects of DBS on the cerebral cortex and thus to provide insights into DBS's mechanisms of action. The modulation of cortical excitability and plasticity by DBS is emerging as a potential contributor to its therapeutic effects. Moreover, pairing DBS and TMS stimuli could represent a method to induce cortical synaptic plasticity, the therapeutic potential of which is still unexplored. Furthermore, the advent of new DBS technologies and novel treatment targets will present new research opportunities and prospects to investigate brain networks. However, the application of the combined TMS-DBS approach is currently limited by safety concerns. In this review, we sought to present an overview of studies performed by combining TMS and DBS in neurological disorders, as well as available evidence and recommendations on the safety of their combination. Additionally, we outline perspectives for future research by highlighting knowledge gaps and possible novel applications of this approach.

Development of anatomically accurate brain phantom for experimental validation of stimulation strengths during TMS

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a non-invasive technique for diagnosis and treatment of various neurological conditions. However, the lack of realistic physical models to test the safety and efficacy of stimulation from magnetic fields generated by the coils has hindered the development of new TMS treatment and diagnosis protocols for several neurological conditions. We have developed an anatomically and geometrically accurate brain and head phantom with an adjustable electrical conductivity matching the average conductivity of white matter and grey matter of the human brain and the cerebrospinal fluid. The process of producing the phantom starts with segmenting the MRI images of the brain and then creating shells from the segmented and reconstructed model ready for 3-D printing and serving as a mold for the conductive polymer. Furthermore, we present SEM images and conductivity measurements of the conductive polymer composite as well as confirmation of the anatomical accuracy of the phantom with computed tomography (CT) images. Finally, we show the results of induced voltage measurements obtained from TMS on the brain phantom.

Safety and recommendations for TMS use in healthy subjects and patient populations, with updates on training, ethical and regulatory issues: Expert Guidelines

This article is based on a consensus conference, promoted and supported by the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology (IFCN), which took place in Siena (Italy) in October 2018. The meeting intended to update the ten-year-old safety guidelines for the application of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in research and clinical settings (Rossi et al., 2009). Therefore, only emerging and new issues are covered in detail, leaving still valid the 2009 recommendations regarding the description of conventional or patterned TMS protocols, the screening of subjects/patients, the need of neurophysiological monitoring for new protocols, the utilization of reference thresholds of stimulation, the managing of seizures and the list of minor side effects. New issues discussed in detail from the meeting up to April 2020 are safety issues of recently developed stimulation devices and pulse configurations; duties and responsibility of device makers; novel scenarios of TMS applications such as in the neuroimaging context or imaging-guided and robot-guided TMS; TMS interleaved with transcranial electrical stimulation; safety during paired associative stimulation interventions; and risks of using TMS to induce therapeutic seizures (magnetic seizure therapy). An update on the possible induction of seizures, theoretically the most serious risk of TMS, is provided. It has become apparent that such a risk is low, even in patients taking drugs acting on the central nervous system, at least with the use of traditional stimulation parameters and focal coils for which large data sets are available. Finally, new operational guidelines are provided for safety in planning future trials based on traditional and patterned TMS protocols, as well as a summary of the minimal training requirements for operators, and a note on ethics of neuroenhancement.

Safety Study of Combination Treatment: Deep Brain Stimulation and Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

Patients with advanced Parkinson’s disease (PD) often receive deep brain stimulation (DBS) treatment, in which conductive leads are surgically implanted in the brain. While DBS treats tremor and rigidity, patients often continue to suffer from speech and swallowing impairments. There is preliminary evidence that transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) of the cortex may be beneficial for these symptoms. However, the potential electromagnetic interactions of the strong magnetic fields from TMS on the conductive leads is unknown, and the combination therapy has not been approved for use. In this article, we report an experimental study of the safety of combining DBS and TMS. We fabricated an anatomically accurate head and brain phantom with electrical conductivities matching cerebrospinal fluid and averaged conductivity of gray and white matter. Induced current on an implanted DBS probe in the brain phantom was measured. Our results show that TMS will induce current values in the range or higher than typical DBS stimulation current. Thus, the combination of TMS/DBS treatment might cause over-stimulation in the brain when stimulated directly over the DBS lead with 100% TMS current intensity.

Effects of deep brain stimulation on the primary motor cortex: Insights from transcranial magnetic stimulation studies

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) implanted in different basal ganglia nuclei regulates the dysfunctional neuronal circuits and improves symptoms in movement disorders. However, the understanding of the neurophysiological mechanism of DBS is at an early stage. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) can be used safely in movement disorder patients with DBS, and can shed light on how DBS works. DBS at a therapeutic setting normalizes the abnormal motor cortical excitability measured with motor evoked potentials (MEP) produced by primary motor cortical TMS. Abnormal intracortical circuits in the motor cortex tested with paired-pulse TMS paradigm also show normalization with DBS. These changes are accompanied with improvements in symptoms after chronic DBS. Single-pulse DBS produces cortical evoked potentials recorded by electroencephalography at specific latencies and modulates motor cortical excitability at certain time intervals measured with MEP. Combination of basal ganglia DBS with motor cortical TMS at stimulus intervals consistent with the latency of cortical evoked potentials delivered in a repetitive mode produces plastic changes in the primary motor cortex. TMS can be used to examine the effects of open and closed loop DBS. Patterned DBS and TMS delivered in a repetitive mode may be developed as a new therapeutic method for movement disorder patients.

Low intensity transcranial electric stimulation: Safety, ethical, legal regulatory and application guidelines

Low intensity transcranial electrical stimulation (TES) in humans, encompassing transcranial direct current (tDCS), transcutaneous spinal Direct Current Stimulation (tsDCS), transcranial alternating current (tACS), and transcranial random noise (tRNS) stimulation or their combinations, appears to be safe. No serious adverse events (SAEs) have been reported so far in over 18,000 sessions administered to healthy subjects, neurological and psychiatric patients, as summarized here. Moderate adverse events (AEs), as defined by the necessity to intervene, are rare, and include skin burns with tDCS due to suboptimal electrode-skin contact. Very rarely mania or hypomania was induced in patients with depression (11 documented cases), yet a causal relationship is difficult to prove because of the low incidence rate and limited numbers of subjects in controlled trials. Mild AEs (MAEs) include headache and fatigue following stimulation as well as prickling and burning sensations occurring during tDCS at peak-to-baseline intensities of 1-2mA and during tACS at higher peak-to-peak intensities above 2mA. The prevalence of published AEs is different in studies specifically assessing AEs vs. those not assessing them, being higher in the former. AEs are frequently reported by individuals receiving placebo stimulation. The profile of AEs in terms of frequency, magnitude and type is comparable in healthy and clinical populations, and this is also the case for more vulnerable populations, such as children, elderly persons, or pregnant women. Combined interventions (e.g., co-application of drugs, electrophysiological measurements, neuroimaging) were not associated with further safety issues. Safety is established for low-intensity 'conventional' TES defined as <4mA, up to 60min duration per day. Animal studies and modeling evidence indicate that brain injury could occur at predicted current densities in the brain of 6.3-13A/m2 that are over an order of magnitude above those produced by tDCS in humans. Using AC stimulation fewer AEs were reported compared to DC. In specific paradigms with amplitudes of up to 10mA, frequencies in the kHz range appear to be safe. In this paper we provide structured interviews and recommend their use in future controlled studies, in particular when trying to extend the parameters applied. We also discuss recent regulatory issues, reporting practices and ethical issues. These recommendations achieved consensus in a meeting, which took place in Göttingen, Germany, on September 6-7, 2016 and were refined thereafter by email correspondence.

Computational Study on the Thermal Effects of Implantable Magnetic Stimulation Based on Planar Coils

GOAL

Micromagnetic stimulation using coils sufficiently small to be implanted has been suggested as a potential method to overcome the limitations of electrical stimulation. We investigated the temperature increases in the brain implanted with planar coils.

METHODS

We conducted computational simulations on the thermal effects of implantable magnetic stimulation in a brain model using finite-element analysis, by varying geometric parameters of planar spiral coils, and repetitive stimulation pulse patterns.

RESULTS

It was revealed that the temperature increase in the brain can be controlled by a careful design of coils to implant. The coil diameter greater than 8 mm was required to induce a temperature rise in the brain of less than 1 °C. If the coil diameter was larger than 10 mm, the subsequent temperature rises in the brain tissue was maintained consistently at about 0.24 °C or lower.

CONCLUSION

Selection of the number of coil turns must rely on tradeoffs between the required current and voltage that the implanted source can generate, as the required voltage increases while the required current decreases with increasing number of coil turns. Additionally, the coil insulation with a thickness of a few micrometers was found to suppress the temperature rise in the brain effectively.

SIGNIFICANCE

Although these simulations employed only one threshold value of 10 V/m, which is rather on the lower end of stimulation threshold, the simulation results are expected to serve as guidelines for designing planar coils to be implanted in the brain for magnetic stimulation.

Fundamentals of transcranial electric and magnetic stimulation dose: definition, selection, and reporting practices

BACKGROUND

The growing use of transcranial electric and magnetic (EM) brain stimulation in basic research and in clinical applications necessitates a clear understanding of what constitutes the dose of EM stimulation and how it should be reported.

METHODS

This paper provides fundamental definitions and principles for reporting of dose that encompass any transcranial EM brain stimulation protocol.

RESULTS

The biologic effects of EM stimulation are mediated through an electromagnetic field injected (via electric stimulation) or induced (via magnetic stimulation) in the body. Therefore, transcranial EM stimulation dose ought to be defined by all parameters of the stimulation device that affect the electromagnetic field generated in the body, including the stimulation electrode or coil configuration parameters: shape, size, position, and electrical properties, as well as the electrode or coil current (or voltage) waveform parameters: pulse shape, amplitude, width, polarity, and repetition frequency; duration of and interval between bursts or trains of pulses; total number of pulses; and interval between stimulation sessions and total number of sessions. Knowledge of the electromagnetic field generated in the body may not be sufficient but is necessary to understand the biologic effects of EM stimulation.

CONCLUSIONS

We believe that reporting of EM stimulation dose should be guided by the principle of reproducibility: sufficient information about the stimulation parameters should be provided so that the dose can be replicated.

High-frequency stimulation in the ventral posterolateral thalamus reverses electrophysiologic changes and hyperalgesia in a rat model of peripheral neuropathic pain

Chronic neuropathic pain is associated with long-term changes at multiple levels of the neuroaxis, including in the brain, where electrical stimulation has been used to manage severe pain conditions. However, the clinical outcome of deep brain stimulation is often mixed, and the mechanisms are poorly understood. By means of electrophysiologic methods, we sought to characterize the changes in neuronal activity in the ventral posterolateral nucleus of the thalamus (VPL) in a rat model of peripheral neuropathic pain, and to reverse these changes with low-voltage, high-frequency stimulation (HFS) in the VPL. Extracellular single-unit neuronal activity was recorded in naive rats and in those with sciatic chronic constriction injury (CCI). Seven days after CCI, brush- and pinch-evoked firing, as well as spontaneous firing and afterdischarge, were significantly increased compared to naive rats. Spontaneous rhythmic oscillation in neuronal firing was also observed in rats with CCI. HFS decreased neuronal firing rates in rats with CCI up to ~50% except for spontaneous activity, whereas low-frequency stimulation had no effect. Compared to naive rats, burst firing properties (burst events, percentage of spikes in burst, and mean interburst time) were altered in rats with CCI, whereas these changes were reversed to near normal after HFS. Thermal hyperalgesia in rats with CCI was significantly attenuated by HFS. Therefore, this study demonstrates that electrical stimulation within the VPL can effectively modulate some nociceptive phenomena associated with peripheral neuropathic pain.

Transcranial magnetic stimulation in the presence of deep brain stimulation implants: Induced electrode currents

The safety of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in patients with an implanted deep brain stimulation (DBS) systems has not been thoroughly investigated. One potential safety hazard is the induction of significant voltages in the subcutaneous leads in the scalp that could result in unintended electrical currents in the DBS electrode contacts. We measured ex-vivo the TMS-induced voltages and currents in DBS electrodes with the implantable pulse generator (IPG) set in various modes of operation. We show that voltages as high as 100 V resulting in currents as high as 83 mA can be induced in the DBS leads by a TMS pulse in all IPG modes. These currents are an order of magnitude higher than the normal DBS pulses, and could result in tissue damage. When the IPG is turned off, electrode currents flow only if the TMS-induced voltage exceeds 5 V.