Analyzing the advantages of subcutaneous over transcutaneous electrical stimulation for activating brainwaves

Abstract

Transcranial electrical stimulation (TES) is a widely accepted neuromodulation modality for treating brain disorders. However, its clinical efficacy is fundamentally limited due to the current shunting effect of the scalp and safety issues. A newer electrical stimulation technique called subcutaneous electrical stimulation (SES) promises to overcome the limitations of TES by applying currents directly at the site of the disorder through the skull. While SES seems promising, the electrophysiological effect of SES compared to TES is still unknown, thus limiting its broader application. Here we comprehensively analyze the SES and TES to demonstrate the effectiveness and advantages of SES. Beagles were bilaterally implanted with subdural strips for intracranial electroencephalography and electric field recording. For the intracerebral electric field prediction, we designed a 3D electromagnetic simulation framework and simulated TES and SES. In the beagle model, SES induces three to four-fold larger cerebral electric fields compared to TES, and significant changes in power ratio of brainwaves were observed only in SES. Our prediction framework suggests that the field penetration of SES would be several-fold larger than TES in human brains. These results demonstrate that the SES would significantly enhance the neuromodulatory effects compared to conventional TES and overcome the TES limitations.

New Era of Electroceuticals: Clinically Driven Smart Implantable Electronic Devices Moving towards Precision Therapy

“…As we discussed, there are multiple challenges and requirements related to electroceuticals; we hope that the advancement in the field of bioelectronics, with the help of allied areas [50,51], will overcome those difficulties. We believe that these technologies will become feasible from concept to reality in the near future.…”

“…Importantly, integrated devices and materials must be tested for toxicity, carcinogenicity, hermeticity, and material degradation over time to achieve efficient performance towards heart functions under safety regulations. With the help of allied areas and technologies [50,51], we hope that this advancement will soon become feasible from concept to reality.…”

“…Analytical modelling and simulation of vagus nerve stimulator design and comparative analysis with the commercially available VNS devices may help us to fabricate more reliable devices while enhancing miniaturization and ultra-low power consumption capability. We hope that the advancement in bioelectronics, with the help of allied areas [50,51], would help overcome the challenges and difficulties associated with traditional devices.…”

A Critical Review of Cranial Electrotherapy Stimulation for Neuromodulation in Clinical and Non-clinical Samples

“…A more recent study recorded EEG before and after CES administered with the Endomed 482 using bilateral earlobe electrodes at 0.5 or 100 Hz, with the sham group using an inactive device (no vestibular or cutaneous sensations were reported for either group). The authors found increased high frequency (11–13 Hz) parietal alpha band activity with 0.5 Hz stimulation, and increased low and mid-frequency temporal beta band activity with 100 Hz stimulation (Lee et al, 2019 ). The authors suggest these results show evidence for CES increasing “clear state of mind,” attention, and concentration.…”

Long-Term Non Anesthetic Preclinical Study Available Extra-Cranial Brain Activator (ECBA) System for the Future Minimally Invasive Human Neuro Modulation

“…Prior to the preclinical study, to estimate the safety of the protocol for the brain, simulations were performed using the quasi-static LF solver in Sim4Life (Zurich med tech, Switzerland) to derive the distribution of the specific absorption rate (SAR) and electrical field (EF) induced in the brain under the protocol conditions (stimulation: 40 Hz, WPT: 0.4 W) in a 3-D model imitating the head structure of a beagle (Fig. 13(a)) [26]. In the EF distribution on the brain surface (Fig.…”