Deep Brain Stimulation Using Evoked Potentials for Electrode Mapping

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing deep brain stimulation (DBS) systems face challenges in optimizing electrode placement and stimulation parameters, leading to non-selective activation of neural elements, which can result in undesirable side effects such as diminished cognitive function due to the spread of current to non-motor pathways, and the large number of electrodes and complex stimulation pulses present a daunting selection challenge for clinicians.

Innovation Solution

The method involves using evoked potentials (EPs), particularly evoked compound action potentials, to compare and estimate the position of electrode leads within the brain by recording and analyzing the differences in neural circuits, allowing for precise adjustment of electrode configuration and stimulation parameters to minimize non-selective activation and optimize therapeutic efficacy.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If high amplitude stimulation is used to ensure therapeutic benefit, then treatment efficacy is improved, but energy consumption increases and non-target tissue stimulation occurs

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetreatment efficacyVSAvoidenergy consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies local quality by using different stimulation amplitudes for different electrode contacts based on their specific anatomical locations and recorded neural responses. Each electrode contact is programmed with customized stimulation parameters tailored to its local neural environment, allowing effective stimulation of target pathways while minimizing energy waste and non-target activation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The patent employs feedback by recording evoked potentials from neural circuits in response to test stimulation, then using these recorded responses to optimize stimulation parameters. The system continuously monitors neural responses and adjusts stimulation amplitude and electrode selection based on the recorded feedback, ensuring effective treatment while minimizing energy consumption.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Reliability

If wide pulse duration is used to ensure therapeutic benefit, then treatment efficacy is improved, but energy consumption increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetreatment efficacyVSAvoidenergy consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies parameter changes by systematically varying pulse duration and amplitude across different electrode contacts based on recorded evoked potentials. The system identifies optimal parameter combinations for each electrode by testing different values and selecting those that produce effective neural responses with minimal energy consumption.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Reliability

If fast stimulation frequency is used to ensure therapeutic benefit, then treatment efficacy is improved, but energy consumption increases and treatment precision decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetreatment efficacyVSAvoidstimulation precision
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies local quality by determining optimal stimulation frequencies for different electrode contacts based on their specific anatomical locations and recorded neural responses. Each electrode contact is programmed with customized frequency parameters tailored to its local neural circuit characteristics, ensuring effective treatment while maintaining precision.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The patent employs feedback by using recorded evoked potentials to optimize stimulation frequency for each electrode contact. The system monitors neural responses at different frequencies and selects the frequency that produces the most effective and selective activation of target neural pathways.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

4Reliability

If electrical field is applied to all neural elements surrounding electrodes, then comprehensive coverage is achieved, but non-selective activation of non-motor pathways occurs causing side effects

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetreatment coverageVSAvoidcognitive side effects
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSObject-generated harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies local quality by using recorded evoked potentials from specific neural circuits to guide stimulation only to electrode contacts that selectively activate motor pathways. By analyzing the characteristics of evoked responses, the system identifies and stimulates only those electrode contacts that produce the desired therapeutic effect without activating non-motor pathways that cause cognitive side effects.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The patent employs feedback by recording and analyzing evoked potentials to determine which electrode contacts produce selective activation of motor pathways. The system uses this feedback information to program stimulation parameters that activate only the intended target pathways while avoiding non-motor structures, thereby preventing cognitive side effects.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

5Measurement precision

If multiple electrodes and complex stimulation pulses are used to optimize therapy, then treatment precision is improved, but device complexity and programming difficulty increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvestimulation precisionVSAvoidelectrode configuration complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent employs feedback by using recorded evoked potentials to automatically identify optimal electrode contacts and stimulation parameters. The system analyzes the recorded neural responses and programmatically determines the best electrode configurations, reducing the burden on clinicians to manually program complex parameters and simplifying the programming process.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

This approach enables more precise electrode placement and stimulation parameter selection, reducing side effects and enhancing the therapeutic effectiveness of DBS by ensuring targeted activation of desired neural pathways while minimizing unnecessary stimulation, thereby improving patient outcomes.

Implementation Method 1

using at least a first of the plurality of electrodes to record first evoked potentials (EPs) evoked by the active stimulation and a second of the plurality of electrodes to record second EPs evoked by the active stimulation

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectEvoked potentials:

Data Source

PatentUS20250302544A1Use of Evoked Potentials in Deep Brain Stimulation Neuromodulation
Publication Date: 2025.10.02 BOSTON SCI NEUROMODULATION CORP
  • US20250302544A1 patent drawing
  • US20250302544A1 patent drawing
  • US20250302544A1 patent drawing

AI summary

Methods and systems for providing deep brain stimulation (DBS) for a patient are described. Electrical stimulation is provided to a patient's brain and evoked potentials (EPs) are recorded at two or more electrodes. The EPs evoked and/or recorded at different electrodes are used to estimate if the respective electrodes are located in the same or different anatomical brain regions. The EPs may also be used to predict or suggest appropriate stimulation rates for therapeutic stimulation.