A universal model of electrochemical safety limits in vivo for electrophysiological stimulation

Electrophysiological stimulation has been widely adopted for clinical diagnostic and therapeutic treatments for modulation of neuronal activity. Safety is a primary concern in an interventional design leveraging the effects of electrical charge injection into tissue in the proximity of target neuron...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ritwik Vatsyayan, Shadi A. Dayeh
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-10-01
Series:Frontiers in Neuroscience
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnins.2022.972252/full
_version_ 1797997204943667200
author Ritwik Vatsyayan
Shadi A. Dayeh
author_facet Ritwik Vatsyayan
Shadi A. Dayeh
author_sort Ritwik Vatsyayan
collection DOAJ
description Electrophysiological stimulation has been widely adopted for clinical diagnostic and therapeutic treatments for modulation of neuronal activity. Safety is a primary concern in an interventional design leveraging the effects of electrical charge injection into tissue in the proximity of target neurons. While modalities of tissue damage during stimulation have been extensively investigated for specific electrode geometries and stimulation paradigms, a comprehensive model that can predict the electrochemical safety limits in vivo doesn’t yet exist. Here we develop a model that accounts for the electrode geometry, inter-electrode separation, material, and stimulation paradigm in predicting safe current injection limits. We performed a parametric investigation of the stimulation limits in both benchtop and in vivo setups for flexible microelectrode arrays with low impedance, high geometric surface area platinum nanorods and PEDOT:PSS, and higher impedance, planar platinum contacts. We benchmark our findings against standard clinical electrocorticography and depth electrodes. Using four, three and two contact electrochemical impedance measurements and comprehensive circuit models derived from these measurements, we developed a more accurate, clinically relevant and predictive model for the electrochemical interface potential. For each electrode configuration, we experimentally determined the geometric correction factors that dictate geometry-enforced current spreading effects. We also determined the electrolysis window from cyclic-voltammetry measurements which allowed us to calculate stimulation current safety limits from voltage transient measurements. From parametric benchtop electrochemical measurements and analyses for different electrode types, we created a predictive equation for the cathodal excitation measured at the electrode interface as a function of the electrode dimensions, geometric factor, material and stimulation paradigm. We validated the accuracy of our equation in vivo and compared the experimentally determined safety limits to clinically used stimulation protocols. Our new model overcomes the design limitations of Shannon’s equation and applies to macro- and micro-electrodes at different density or separation of contacts, captures the breakdown of charge-density based approaches at long stimulation pulse widths, and invokes appropriate power exponents to current, pulse width, and material/electrode-dependent impedance.
first_indexed 2024-04-11T10:29:27Z
format Article
id doaj.art-8a4c1ee91d5a4addb47fff2832f37ee5
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1662-453X
language English
last_indexed 2024-04-11T10:29:27Z
publishDate 2022-10-01
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format Article
series Frontiers in Neuroscience
spelling doaj.art-8a4c1ee91d5a4addb47fff2832f37ee52022-12-22T04:29:28ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Neuroscience1662-453X2022-10-011610.3389/fnins.2022.972252972252A universal model of electrochemical safety limits in vivo for electrophysiological stimulationRitwik VatsyayanShadi A. DayehElectrophysiological stimulation has been widely adopted for clinical diagnostic and therapeutic treatments for modulation of neuronal activity. Safety is a primary concern in an interventional design leveraging the effects of electrical charge injection into tissue in the proximity of target neurons. While modalities of tissue damage during stimulation have been extensively investigated for specific electrode geometries and stimulation paradigms, a comprehensive model that can predict the electrochemical safety limits in vivo doesn’t yet exist. Here we develop a model that accounts for the electrode geometry, inter-electrode separation, material, and stimulation paradigm in predicting safe current injection limits. We performed a parametric investigation of the stimulation limits in both benchtop and in vivo setups for flexible microelectrode arrays with low impedance, high geometric surface area platinum nanorods and PEDOT:PSS, and higher impedance, planar platinum contacts. We benchmark our findings against standard clinical electrocorticography and depth electrodes. Using four, three and two contact electrochemical impedance measurements and comprehensive circuit models derived from these measurements, we developed a more accurate, clinically relevant and predictive model for the electrochemical interface potential. For each electrode configuration, we experimentally determined the geometric correction factors that dictate geometry-enforced current spreading effects. We also determined the electrolysis window from cyclic-voltammetry measurements which allowed us to calculate stimulation current safety limits from voltage transient measurements. From parametric benchtop electrochemical measurements and analyses for different electrode types, we created a predictive equation for the cathodal excitation measured at the electrode interface as a function of the electrode dimensions, geometric factor, material and stimulation paradigm. We validated the accuracy of our equation in vivo and compared the experimentally determined safety limits to clinically used stimulation protocols. Our new model overcomes the design limitations of Shannon’s equation and applies to macro- and micro-electrodes at different density or separation of contacts, captures the breakdown of charge-density based approaches at long stimulation pulse widths, and invokes appropriate power exponents to current, pulse width, and material/electrode-dependent impedance.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnins.2022.972252/fullstimulationpulse widthimpedancesafety limitelectrophysiology
spellingShingle Ritwik Vatsyayan
Shadi A. Dayeh
A universal model of electrochemical safety limits in vivo for electrophysiological stimulation
Frontiers in Neuroscience
stimulation
pulse width
impedance
safety limit
electrophysiology
title A universal model of electrochemical safety limits in vivo for electrophysiological stimulation
title_full A universal model of electrochemical safety limits in vivo for electrophysiological stimulation
title_fullStr A universal model of electrochemical safety limits in vivo for electrophysiological stimulation
title_full_unstemmed A universal model of electrochemical safety limits in vivo for electrophysiological stimulation
title_short A universal model of electrochemical safety limits in vivo for electrophysiological stimulation
title_sort universal model of electrochemical safety limits in vivo for electrophysiological stimulation
topic stimulation
pulse width
impedance
safety limit
electrophysiology
url https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnins.2022.972252/full
work_keys_str_mv AT ritwikvatsyayan auniversalmodelofelectrochemicalsafetylimitsinvivoforelectrophysiologicalstimulation
AT shadiadayeh auniversalmodelofelectrochemicalsafetylimitsinvivoforelectrophysiologicalstimulation
AT ritwikvatsyayan universalmodelofelectrochemicalsafetylimitsinvivoforelectrophysiologicalstimulation
AT shadiadayeh universalmodelofelectrochemicalsafetylimitsinvivoforelectrophysiologicalstimulation