Journals / Kocaeli Journal of Science and Engineering / 2023 / Cilt: 6 Sayı: 2

Transcutaneous Nerve Stimulation Current Thresholds Based on Nerve Bending Angle and Nerve Termination Point

Pages
162–171
Publication Date
2023-11-30
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The results showed that the geometric features of the target nerve have a significant effect on the required stimulus current thresholds.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:There is increasing interest in using transcutaneous electrical stimulation to treat or suppress brain-related disorders.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Twenty nerve models were generated considering statistical variations to assess the effect of the nerve geometrical features on the target neuromodulatory system.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results showed that the geometric features of the target nerve have a significant effect on the required stimulus current thresholds.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:electrical stimulation · FEM computational models · nerve bending

Abstract

There is increasing interest in using transcutaneous electrical stimulation to treat or suppress brain-related disorders. Primary headache disorder is a socioeconomic burden whose pharmaceutical and invasive treatment method may have troublesome side effects. There are various transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation neuromodulation systems that are used for health-related disorders. TMany factors may affect these systems’ efficiency, including stimulus current levels. A device for primary headaches showed mixed results. This may be related to the higher stimulus current levels that are applied through the electrodes. A feasible solution to reduce the required current levels is considering the geometrical features of the target nerve bending and nerve termination trajectories. In this study, the impact of the geometrical features of the nerve, such as nerve bending and nerve termination, on the stimulus current thresholds were analyzed based on FEM hybrid models. Twenty nerve models were generated considering statistical variations to assess the effect of the nerve geometrical features on the target neuromodulatory system. Finally, the safety parameters were calculated based on the target neuromodulator settings. The results showed that the geometric features of the target nerve have a significant effect on the required stimulus current thresholds. These results may provide important guidance mainly for transcutaneous nerve stimulation and future electrical nerve stimulation design.

🔖

Cite This Article

SALKIM, E. (2023). Transcutaneous Nerve Stimulation Current Thresholds Based on Nerve Bending Angle and Nerve Termination Point. Kocaeli Journal of Science and Engineering, Cilt: 6 Sayı: 2, 162–171. https://ajindex.com/articles/1020344

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Johnson M. I. and Bjordal J. M., 2011. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation for the management of painful conditions: focus on neuropathic pain, Expert Rev. Neurother., 11(5), pp. 735–753
  2. Headache Classification Committee of the International Headache Society (IHS)., 2013. The International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition (beta version), Cephalalgia, 33(9), pp. 629–808
  3. Magis D. et al., 2016. Cerebral metabolism before and after external trigeminal nerve stimulation in episodic migraine, Cephalalgia, 37(9), pp. 1–11
  4. Riederer F., Penning S., and Schoenen J., 2015. Transcutaneous Supraorbital Nerve Stimulation (t-SNS) with the Cefaly(®) Device for Migraine Prevention: A Review of the Available Data, Pain Therapy., 4(2), pp. 135–147
  5. Magis D., Sava S., d’Elia T. S., Baschi R., and Schoenen J., 2013. Safety and patients’ satisfaction of transcutaneous supraorbital neurostimulation (tSNS) with the Cefaly® device in headache treatment: a survey of 2,313 headache sufferers in the general population, J. Headache Pain, 14, p. 95
  6. Schoenen J. et al., 2013. Migraine prevention with a supraorbital transcutaneous stimulator: A randomized controlled trial, Neurology, 80(8), pp. 697–704
  7. Salkim E., Shiraz A. N., and Demosthenous A., 2017. Effect of Nerve Variations on the Stimulus Current Level in a Wearable Neuromodulator for Migraine: A Modeling Study, in 8th International IEEE EMBS Conference on Neural Engineering, pp. 239–242
  8. Schiefer M. A. and Grill W. M., 2006. Sites of Neuronal Excitation by Epiretinal Electrical Stimulation, 14(1), pp. 5–13
  9. Rubinstein J. T. and Rubinstein J. T., 1193. Axon Termination Conditions for Electrical Stimulation, IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng., 40(7), pp. 654–663
  10. Butson C. R., Computational Models of Neuromodulation, 2012. 1st ed., 107. Elsevier Inc
  11. Salkim E., Shiraz A. N., and Demosthenous A., 2017. Effect of Model Complexity on Fiber Activation Estimates in a Wearable Neuromodulator for Migraine, in 2017 IEEE Biomedical Circuits and Systems Conference, pp. 1–4
  12. Salkim E., Shiraz A., and Demosthenous A., 2018. Influence of cellular structures of skin on fiber activation thresholds and computation cost influence of cellular structures of skin on fiber activation thresholds and computation cost, Biomed. Phys. Eng. Express, 5(1), p. 015015
  13. Bikson M., Rahman A., and Datta A., 2012. Computational Models of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation, Clin. EEG Neu