Modelling the response of scalp sensory receptors to transcranial electrical stimulation

Article

Abstract

Transcranial electrical stimulation of the brain cause considerable discomfort to the patient. The purpose of the study was to find out whether this could be affected by the choice of stimulation parameters. A spherical volume conductor model of the head and active compartmental models of a pyramidal motor nerve and scalp nociceptor were used in combination to simulate the scalp nociception to transcranial electrical stimulation. Scalp nociceptors were excited at distances of several centimetres from the electrodes. The size of the excited scalp area correlated with the length of the stimulation pulse. The area was 12.3, 20.4 and 26.0 cm2, for a 10μs, 100μs and 1 ms constant current pulse, respectively. With a 100 μs constant current pulse, the threshold for motor excitation was 205 mA and, for nociception, it was 51 mA. There was no significant difference between constant current and capacitor discharge pulses or between electrodes of different sizes. The results imply that the use of very short stimulation pulses can reduce the pain. If a topical anaesthesia is used to reduce the pain, it has to be applied on a large area around the electrodes.

Keywords

Motor cortex Motor evoked potentials Pain Electric stimulation Computer simulation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aiello, I., Sau, G. E., Cacciotto, R., Posadinu, D., Muzzu, S., andRosati, G. (1991) ‘Low voltage bifocal electrical stimulation of the motor cortex’,Electromyogr. Clin. Neurophysiol.,31, pp. 187–191Google Scholar
  2. Awiszus, F. (1991): ‘The influence of an unmyelinated terminal on repetitive firing of a mammalian receptor afferent fiber’,Biol. Cybern.,64, pp. 421–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barker, A. T., Jalinous, R., andFreeston, I. L. (1985): ‘Noninvasive magnetic stimulation of the human motor cortex’,Lancet,i, pp. 1106–1107Google Scholar
  4. Bower, J. M., andBeeman, D. (1995): ‘The book of genesis. Exploring realistic neural models with the GEneral NEural SImulation System’ (TELOS, New York, 1995)Google Scholar
  5. Burke, D., Hicks, R., Stephen, J., Woodforth, I., andCrawford, M. (1992): ‘Assessment of corticospinal and somatosensory conduction simultaneously during scoliosis surgery’,Electroenceph Clin. Neurophysiol.,85, pp. 388–396Google Scholar
  6. Burke, D., andHicks, R. G. (1998): ‘Surgical monitoring of motor pathways’,J. Clin. Neurophysiol.,15, pp. 194–205Google Scholar
  7. Calancie, B., Harris, W., Broton, J. G., Alexeeva, N., andGreen, B. A. (1998): “Threshold level' multipulse transcranial electrical stimulation of motor cortex for intraoperative monitoring of spinal motor tracts: description of method and comparison to somatosensory evoked potential monitoring’,J. Neurosurg.,88, pp. 457–470Google Scholar
  8. Di Lazzaro, V., Oliviero, A., Profice, P., Ferrara, L., Saturno, E., Pilato, F., andTonali, P. (1999): ‘The diagnostic value of motor evoked potentials’,Clin. Neurophysiol.,110, pp. 1297–1307Google Scholar
  9. Geddes, L. A. (1987): ‘Optimal stimulus duration for extracranial cortical stimulation’,Neurosurgery,20, pp. 94–99Google Scholar
  10. Gualtierotti, T., andPaterson, A. S. (1954): ‘Electrical stimulation of the unexposed cerebral cortex’,J. Physiol.,125, pp. 278–291Google Scholar
  11. Häkkinen, V., Eskola, II, Yli-Hankala, A., Nurmikko, T., andKolehmainen, S. (1995): ‘Which structures are sensitive to painful transcranial electric stimulation?’,Electromyogr. Clin. Neurophysiol.,35, pp. 377–383Google Scholar
  12. Hodgkin, A., andHuxley, A. (1952): ‘A quantitative description of membrane current and its application to conduction and excitation in nerve’,J. Physiol. (Lond.),117, pp. 500–544Google Scholar
  13. Jones, S. J., Harrison, R., Koh, K. F., Mendoza, N., andCrockard, H. A. (1996): ‘Motor evoked potential monitoring during spinal surgery: responses of distal limb muscles to transcranial cortical stimulation with pulse trains,Electroenceph. Clin. Neurophysiol.,100, pp. 375–383Google Scholar
  14. Kim, Y., Zieber, H. G., andWang, F. E. (1990): ‘Uniformity of current density under stimulating electrodes’,Crit. Rev. Biomed. Eng.,17, pp. 585–619Google Scholar
  15. McNeal, D. R. (1976): ‘Analysis of a model for excitation of myelinated nerve’,IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng.,23, pp. 329–337Google Scholar
  16. Merton, P. A., andMorton, H. B. (1980): ‘Stimulation of the cerebral cortex in the intact human subject’,Nature,285, p. 227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Messlinger, K. (1996): ‘Functional morphology of nociceptive and other fine sensory endings (free nerve endings) in different tissues’,Progr. Brain Res.,113, pp. 273–298Google Scholar
  18. Oostendorp, T. F., Delbeke, J., andStegeman, D. F. (2000): ‘The conductivity of the human skull: results ofin vivo andin vitro measurements’,IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng.,47, pp. 1487–1492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Pechstein, U., Cedzich, C., Nadstawek, J., andSchramm, J. (1996): ‘Transcranial high-frequency repetitive electrical stimulation for recording myogenic motor evoked potentials with the patient under general anesthesia’,Neurosurgery,39, pp. 335–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rossini, P. M., Marciani, M. G., Caramia, M., Roma, V., andZarola, F. (1985): ‘Nervous propagation along ‘central’ motor pathways in intact man: characteristics of motor responses to ‘bifocal’ and ‘unifocal’ spine and scalp non-invasive stimulation’,Electroenceph. Clin. Neurophysiol.,61, pp. 272–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rossini, P. M., Barker, A. T., Berardelli, A., Caramia, M. D., Caruso, G., Cracco, R. Q., Dimitrijevic, M. R., Hallet, M., Marsden, C. D., Murray, N. M. F., Rothwell, J. C., Swash, M., andTomberg, C. (1994): ‘Non-invasive electrical and magnetic stimulation of the brain, spinal cord and roots: basic principles and procedures for routine clinical application. Report of an IFCN committee’,Electroenceph. Clin. Neurophysiol.,91, pp. 79–92Google Scholar
  22. Rush, S., andDriscoll, D. A. (1969): ‘EEG electrode sensitivity—an application of reciprocity’,IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng.,16, pp. 15–22Google Scholar
  23. Schwarz, J. R., Reid, G., andBostock, H. (1995): ‘Action potentials and membrane currents in the human node of Ranvier’,Eur. J. Physiol.,430, pp. 283–292Google Scholar
  24. Suihko, V., Malmivuo, J., andEskola, H. (1994): ‘Three-electrode versus unifocal technique in transcranial electrical stimulation’.Med. Biol. Eng. Comput.,34, pp. 287–288Google Scholar
  25. Suihko, V. (1998): ‘Modeling direct activation of corticospinal axons using transcranial electrical stimulation’,Electroenceph. Clin. Neurophys.,109, pp. 238–244Google Scholar
  26. Sweeney, J. D., Mortimer, J. T., andDurand, D. (1987): ‘Modeling of mammalian myelinated nerve for functional neuromuscular stimulation’. Proceedings of IEEE 9th Annual Conference of EMBS, pp. 1577–1578Google Scholar
  27. Warman, E. N., Grill, W. M., andDurand, D. (1992): ‘Modeling the effects of electric fields on nerve fibers: determination of excitation thresholds’,IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng.,39, pp. 1244–1254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wesselink, W. A., Holsheimer, J., andBoom, H. B. K. (1999): ‘A model of the electrical behaviour of myelinated sensory nerve fibres based on human data’,Med. Biol. Eng. Comput.,37, pp. 228–235Google Scholar
  29. Zentner, J. (1989): ‘Modified impulse diminishes discomfort of transcranial electrical stimulation of the motor cortex’,Electromyogr. Clin. Neurophys.,29, pp. 93–97Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFMBE 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Clinical NeurophysiologyTampere University Hospital, Tampere and Seinäjoki Central HospitalSeinäjokiFinland

Personalised recommendations