Unwrapped 2D View for Complex Stimulation Lead Programming

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

The process of selecting electrode combinations for implantable electrical stimulators is time-consuming and requires significant trial and error, especially with complex electrode array geometries, leading to challenges in optimizing therapy parameters and managing side effects effectively.

Innovation Solution

A user interface that allows clinicians to view electrodes from different perspectives and manipulate stimulation fields, enabling guided programming and automated selection of electrode combinations and parameters to support therapeutic efficacy, including unwrapped 2D array views and axial/rotational controls for efficient evaluation and programming.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If physicians manually test electrode combinations using intuition or idiosyncratic methodologies, then they can identify therapeutic programs, but the process becomes time-consuming and tedious

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveprogramming efficiencyVSAvoidtime required for electrode combination selection
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system enables automated selection of electrode combinations through algorithms that independently evaluate multiple configurations based on clinical criteria, eliminating the need for manual trial-and-error testing by physicians

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system incorporates feedback mechanisms that allow real-time evaluation of electrode combination performance, enabling automated adjustment and selection of optimal configurations based on measured therapeutic outcomes

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Adaptability or versatility

If implantable stimulators have larger numbers of electrode combinations and larger parameter ranges, then the ability to adjust therapy for particular patients increases, but the burden of optimizing device parameters increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetherapy customization capabilityVSAvoidparameter optimization burden
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The automated programming system independently navigates the complex parameter space, performing evaluations and optimizations without requiring physician intervention, thus maintaining high adaptability while reducing operational burden

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary automated evaluations of multiple electrode combinations and parameter configurations before clinical deployment, pre-identifying optimal settings that reduce the burden of real-time optimization

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

3Reliability

If physicians test a large number of possible electrode combinations to identify optimal configurations, then therapeutic efficacy can be improved, but the process requires significant trial and error

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetherapeutic efficacyVSAvoidprogramming simplicity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The automated system independently performs comprehensive testing of electrode combinations using structured algorithms, achieving high reliability through systematic evaluation while maintaining ease of operation by eliminating manual trial-and-error processes

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Data Source

PatentEP1991307B1Programming interface with an unwrapped 2d view of a stimulation lead with complex electrode array geometry
Publication Date: 2015.01.21 MEDTRONIC INC
  • EP1991307B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP1991307B1 patent drawingFigure 2A~2B
  • EP1991307B1 patent drawingFigure 3A~3D

AI summary

The disclosure is directed to programming implantable stimulators to deliver stimulation energy via one or more implantable leads having complex electrode array geometries. The disclosure also contemplates guided programming to select electrode combinations and parameter values to support efficacy. The techniques may be applied to a programming interface associated with a clinician programmer, a patient programmer, or both. A user interface permits a user to view electrodes from different perspectives relative to the lead. For example, the user interface provides an unwrapped two-dimensional array view of a lead and a concentric axial view of the lead. The user interface may include an axial control medium to select and/or view electrodes at different axial positions along the length of a lead, and a rotational control medium to select and/or view electrodes at different angular positions around a circumference of the lead.