Detail
Article
Online article
FT
Medvik - BMC
  • Something wrong with this record ?

The sensitivity of ECG contamination to surgical implantation site in brain computer interfaces

WJ. Neumann, M. Memarian Sorkhabi, M. Benjaber, LK. Feldmann, A. Saryyeva, JK. Krauss, MF. Contarino, T. Sieger, R. Jech, G. Tinkhauser, C. Pollo, C. Palmisano, IU. Isaias, DD. Cummins, SJ. Little, PA. Starr, V. Kokkinos, S. Gerd-Helge, T....

. 2021 ; 14 (5) : 1301-1306. [pub] 20210821

Language English Country United States

Document type Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Persistent link   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc22003788

Grant support
MC_UU_12024/1 Medical Research Council - United Kingdom

BACKGROUND: Brain sensing devices are approved today for Parkinson's, essential tremor, and epilepsy therapies. Clinical decisions for implants are often influenced by the premise that patients will benefit from using sensing technology. However, artifacts, such as ECG contamination, can render such treatments unreliable. Therefore, clinicians need to understand how surgical decisions may affect artifact probability. OBJECTIVES: Investigate neural signal contamination with ECG activity in sensing enabled neurostimulation systems, and in particular clinical choices such as implant location that impact signal fidelity. METHODS: Electric field modeling and empirical signals from 85 patients were used to investigate the relationship between implant location and ECG contamination. RESULTS: The impact on neural recordings depends on the difference between ECG signal and noise floor of the electrophysiological recording. Empirically, we demonstrate that severe ECG contamination was more than 3.2x higher in left-sided subclavicular implants (48.3%), when compared to right-sided implants (15.3%). Cranial implants did not show ECG contamination. CONCLUSIONS: Given the relative frequency of corrupted neural signals, we conclude that implant location will impact the ability of brain sensing devices to be used for "closed-loop" algorithms. Clinical adjustments such as implant location can significantly affect signal integrity and need consideration.

References provided by Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc22003788
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20220127145849.0
007      
ta
008      
220113s2021 xxu f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1016/j.brs.2021.08.016 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)34428554
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xxu
100    1_
$a Neumann, Wolf-Julian $u Movement Disorder and Neuromodulation Unit, Department of Neurology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Chariteplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany. Electronic address: julian.neumann@charite.de
245    14
$a The sensitivity of ECG contamination to surgical implantation site in brain computer interfaces / $c WJ. Neumann, M. Memarian Sorkhabi, M. Benjaber, LK. Feldmann, A. Saryyeva, JK. Krauss, MF. Contarino, T. Sieger, R. Jech, G. Tinkhauser, C. Pollo, C. Palmisano, IU. Isaias, DD. Cummins, SJ. Little, PA. Starr, V. Kokkinos, S. Gerd-Helge, T. Herrington, P. Brown, RM. Richardson, AA. Kühn, T. Denison
520    9_
$a BACKGROUND: Brain sensing devices are approved today for Parkinson's, essential tremor, and epilepsy therapies. Clinical decisions for implants are often influenced by the premise that patients will benefit from using sensing technology. However, artifacts, such as ECG contamination, can render such treatments unreliable. Therefore, clinicians need to understand how surgical decisions may affect artifact probability. OBJECTIVES: Investigate neural signal contamination with ECG activity in sensing enabled neurostimulation systems, and in particular clinical choices such as implant location that impact signal fidelity. METHODS: Electric field modeling and empirical signals from 85 patients were used to investigate the relationship between implant location and ECG contamination. RESULTS: The impact on neural recordings depends on the difference between ECG signal and noise floor of the electrophysiological recording. Empirically, we demonstrate that severe ECG contamination was more than 3.2x higher in left-sided subclavicular implants (48.3%), when compared to right-sided implants (15.3%). Cranial implants did not show ECG contamination. CONCLUSIONS: Given the relative frequency of corrupted neural signals, we conclude that implant location will impact the ability of brain sensing devices to be used for "closed-loop" algorithms. Clinical adjustments such as implant location can significantly affect signal integrity and need consideration.
650    _2
$a algoritmy $7 D000465
650    _2
$a artefakty $7 D016477
650    12
$a rozhraní mozek-počítač $7 D062207
650    _2
$a elektrokardiografie $7 D004562
650    12
$a esenciální tremor $7 D020329
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
700    1_
$a Memarian Sorkhabi, Majid $u MRC Brain Network Dynamics Unit, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, United Kingdom
700    1_
$a Benjaber, Moaad $u MRC Brain Network Dynamics Unit, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, United Kingdom
700    1_
$a Feldmann, Lucia K $u Movement Disorder and Neuromodulation Unit, Department of Neurology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Chariteplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany
700    1_
$a Saryyeva, Assel $u Department of Neurosurgery, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Hannover, Germany
700    1_
$a Krauss, Joachim K $u Department of Neurosurgery, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Hannover, Germany
700    1_
$a Contarino, Maria Fiorella $u Department of Neurology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands; Department of Neurology, Haga Teaching Hospital, The Hague, the Netherlands
700    1_
$a Sieger, Tomas $u Department of Neurology, Charles University, 1st Faculty of Medicine and General University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Jech, Robert $u Department of Neurology, Charles University, 1st Faculty of Medicine and General University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Tinkhauser, Gerd $u Department of Neurology, Bern University Hospital and University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
700    1_
$a Pollo, Claudio $u Department of Neurosurgery, Bern University Hospital and University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
700    1_
$a Palmisano, Chiara $u Department of Neurology, University Hospital of Würzburg and Julius Maximilian University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
700    1_
$a Isaias, Ioannis U $u Department of Neurology, University Hospital of Würzburg and Julius Maximilian University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
700    1_
$a Cummins, Daniel D $u Department of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA
700    1_
$a Little, Simon J $u Department of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA
700    1_
$a Starr, Philip A $u Department of Neurological Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA
700    1_
$a Kokkinos, Vasileios $u Department of Neurosurgery, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
700    1_
$a Gerd-Helge, Schneider $u Department of Neurosurgery, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Chariteplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany
700    1_
$a Herrington, Todd $u Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
700    1_
$a Brown, Peter $u MRC Brain Network Dynamics Unit, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, United Kingdom
700    1_
$a Richardson, R Mark $u Department of Neurosurgery, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
700    1_
$a Kühn, Andrea A $u Movement Disorder and Neuromodulation Unit, Department of Neurology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Chariteplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany
700    1_
$a Denison, Timothy $u MRC Brain Network Dynamics Unit, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, United Kingdom
773    0_
$w MED00166625 $t Brain stimulation $x 1876-4754 $g Roč. 14, č. 5 (2021), s. 1301-1306
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34428554 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
990    __
$a 20220113 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20220127145845 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1751293 $s 1154937
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2021 $b 14 $c 5 $d 1301-1306 $e 20210821 $i 1876-4754 $m Brain stimulation $n Brain Stimulat $x MED00166625
GRA    __
$a MC_UU_12024/1 $p Medical Research Council $2 United Kingdom
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20220113

Find record

Citation metrics

Archiving options