← Explore

Effective Parameters for Ultrasound-Induced In Vivo Neurostimulation

Randy L. King, Julian R. Brown, William T. Newsome, Kim Butts Pauly

Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology 2013, 39, 312-331 · 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2012.09.009

rodenthealthyemg mep

Abstract

Ultrasound-induced neurostimulation has recently gained increasing attention, but little is known about the mechanisms by which it affects neural activity or about the range of acoustic parameters and stimulation protocols that elicit responses. We have established conditions for transcranial stimulation of the nervous system in vivo, using the mouse somatomotor response. We report that (1) continuous-wave stimuli are as effective as or more effective than pulsed stimuli in eliciting responses, and responses are elicited with stimulus onset rather than stimulus offset; (2) stimulation success increases as a function of both acoustic intensity and acoustic duration; (3) interactions of intensity and duration suggest that successful stimulation results from the integration of stimulus amplitude over a time interval of 50 to 150 ms; and (4) the motor response elicited appears to be an all-or-nothing phenomenon, meaning stronger stimulus intensities and durations increase the probability of a motor response without affecting the duration or strength of the response.

Abstract via europepmc.

Speciesmouse
Subjects33 animals
Sessions per subjectnot reported
Randomisednot reported
Blindingnot reported
Sham / controlinactive transducer
Auditory controlother
Readout timingonline
Anaesthesiaanaesthetised
Readoutsemg mepElectromyography (EMG) of the triceps muscle to detect ultrasound-evoked limb twitches
Direction of effectexcitatoryContinuous-wave and pulsed transcranial ultrasound elicited short-latency limb muscle twitches (EMG-detected) in an all-or-nothing fashion, with success rate increasing with intensity, duration, and PRF.
Adverse eventsnone observedIn all respects (eating, drinking, locomotion), the animals appeared normal after recovering from anesthesia.

Exposures

Exposure 1: Continuous-wave and pulsed transcranial ultrasound stimulation of mouse motor cortex/basal ganglia at 500 kHz

Target: motor cortex, basal ganglia — “the basal ganglia and the motor cortex
Device: Olympus / Panametrics · Olympus · V301

Pulse timing
Waveformcontinuous, pulsed
Fundamental frequency (kHz)500✓✓
Pulse duration (ms)0.2✓✓
Pulse repetition frequency (Hz)11, 3,000swept✓✓
Duty cycle (%)2, 30, 60swept✓✓
Sonication duration (s)0.02, 0.04, 0.08, 0.16, 0.24, 0.32, 0.48swept✓✓
Pressure and intensity, by domain
Free-field pressure (kPa)30, 1,110swept✓✓
Free-field Isppa (W/cm²)0.01, 79.02swept✓✓
Free-field Ispta (W/cm²)not reported
In-situ estimatemeasurementsingle value
In-situ pressure (kPa)not reported
In-situ Isppa (W/cm²)not reported
In-situ Ispta (W/cm²)not reported
Protocol, in the paper’s words

All experiments were conducted using continuous-wave ultrasound sonications at the center frequency of the transducer (500 kHz), unless otherwise noted; sonication durations varied from 20 to 480 ms, and intensities ranged from 0.01 to 79.02 W/cm2 (0.03 to 1.11 MPa). For pulsed ultrasound, the pulse repetition frequency was held constant at 1.5 kHz with 100 cycles per pulse (30% duty cycle) in the CW-vs-pulsed comparison, and separately varied between 11 and 3000 Hz (100 cycles per pulse, 120 pulses per train) in the PRF experiment. The specified sonication conditions were generated in a pseudo-random sequence, with a minimum interval between sonications of 5 s.

Exposure 2: Frequency-response characterization at 250 kHz

Target: motor cortex, basal ganglia — “the basal ganglia and the motor cortex
Device: Olympus / Panametrics · Olympus · V301

Pulse timing
Waveformcontinuous
Fundamental frequency (kHz)250✓✓
Pulse duration (ms)not applicable
Pulse repetition frequency (Hz)not applicable
Duty cycle (%)not applicable
Sonication duration (s)0.16✓✓
Pressure and intensity, by domain
Free-field pressure (kPa)not reported
Free-field Isppa (W/cm²)not reported
Free-field Ispta (W/cm²)not reported
In-situ estimatenot reported
In-situ pressure (kPa)not reported
In-situ Isppa (W/cm²)not reported
In-situ Ispta (W/cm²)not reported
Protocol, in the paper’s words

Continuous-wave sonications of 40,000 cycles were delivered at this frequency using 3 driving voltages (75, 150 and 300 mVpp) in blocks, to test how success rate depended on carrier frequency; the resulting acoustic intensities are shown only in Figure 10, not stated numerically in the text.

Exposure 3: Frequency-response characterization at 300 kHz

Target: motor cortex, basal ganglia — “the basal ganglia and the motor cortex
Device: Olympus / Panametrics · Olympus · V301

Pulse timing
Waveformcontinuous
Fundamental frequency (kHz)300✓✓
Pulse duration (ms)not applicable
Pulse repetition frequency (Hz)not applicable
Duty cycle (%)not applicable
Sonication duration (s)0.133✓✓
Pressure and intensity, by domain
Free-field pressure (kPa)not reported
Free-field Isppa (W/cm²)not reported
Free-field Ispta (W/cm²)not reported
In-situ estimatenot reported
In-situ pressure (kPa)not reported
In-situ Isppa (W/cm²)not reported
In-situ Ispta (W/cm²)not reported
Protocol, in the paper’s words

Continuous-wave sonications of 40,000 cycles were delivered at this frequency using 3 driving voltages (75, 150 and 300 mVpp) in blocks, to test how success rate depended on carrier frequency; the resulting acoustic intensities are shown only in Figure 10, not stated numerically in the text.

Exposure 4: Frequency-response characterization at 350 kHz

Target: motor cortex, basal ganglia — “the basal ganglia and the motor cortex
Device: Olympus / Panametrics · Olympus · V301

Pulse timing
Waveformcontinuous
Fundamental frequency (kHz)350✓✓
Pulse duration (ms)not applicable
Pulse repetition frequency (Hz)not applicable
Duty cycle (%)not applicable
Sonication duration (s)0.114✓✓
Pressure and intensity, by domain
Free-field pressure (kPa)not reported
Free-field Isppa (W/cm²)not reported
Free-field Ispta (W/cm²)not reported
In-situ estimatenot reported
In-situ pressure (kPa)not reported
In-situ Isppa (W/cm²)not reported
In-situ Ispta (W/cm²)not reported
Protocol, in the paper’s words

Continuous-wave sonications of 40,000 cycles were delivered at this frequency using 3 driving voltages (75, 150 and 300 mVpp) in blocks, to test how success rate depended on carrier frequency; the resulting acoustic intensities are shown only in Figure 10, not stated numerically in the text.

Exposure 5: Frequency-response characterization at 400 kHz

Target: motor cortex, basal ganglia — “the basal ganglia and the motor cortex
Device: Olympus / Panametrics · Olympus · V301

Pulse timing
Waveformcontinuous
Fundamental frequency (kHz)400✓✓
Pulse duration (ms)not applicable
Pulse repetition frequency (Hz)not applicable
Duty cycle (%)not applicable
Sonication duration (s)0.1✓✓
Pressure and intensity, by domain
Free-field pressure (kPa)not reported
Free-field Isppa (W/cm²)not reported
Free-field Ispta (W/cm²)not reported
In-situ estimatenot reported
In-situ pressure (kPa)not reported
In-situ Isppa (W/cm²)not reported
In-situ Ispta (W/cm²)not reported
Protocol, in the paper’s words

Continuous-wave sonications of 40,000 cycles were delivered at this frequency using 3 driving voltages (75, 150 and 300 mVpp) in blocks, to test how success rate depended on carrier frequency; the resulting acoustic intensities are shown only in Figure 10, not stated numerically in the text.

Exposure 6: Frequency-response characterization at 450 kHz

Target: motor cortex, basal ganglia — “the basal ganglia and the motor cortex
Device: Olympus / Panametrics · Olympus · V301

Pulse timing
Waveformcontinuous
Fundamental frequency (kHz)450✓✓
Pulse duration (ms)not applicable
Pulse repetition frequency (Hz)not applicable
Duty cycle (%)not applicable
Sonication duration (s)0.0889✓✓
Pressure and intensity, by domain
Free-field pressure (kPa)not reported
Free-field Isppa (W/cm²)not reported
Free-field Ispta (W/cm²)not reported
In-situ estimatenot reported
In-situ pressure (kPa)not reported
In-situ Isppa (W/cm²)not reported
In-situ Ispta (W/cm²)not reported
Protocol, in the paper’s words

Continuous-wave sonications of 40,000 cycles were delivered at this frequency using 3 driving voltages (75, 150 and 300 mVpp) in blocks, to test how success rate depended on carrier frequency; the resulting acoustic intensities are shown only in Figure 10, not stated numerically in the text.

Exposure 7: Frequency-response characterization at 550 kHz

Target: motor cortex, basal ganglia — “the basal ganglia and the motor cortex
Device: Olympus / Panametrics · Olympus · V301

Pulse timing
Waveformcontinuous
Fundamental frequency (kHz)550✓✓
Pulse duration (ms)not applicable
Pulse repetition frequency (Hz)not applicable
Duty cycle (%)not applicable
Sonication duration (s)0.0727✓✓
Pressure and intensity, by domain
Free-field pressure (kPa)not reported
Free-field Isppa (W/cm²)not reported
Free-field Ispta (W/cm²)not reported
In-situ estimatenot reported
In-situ pressure (kPa)not reported
In-situ Isppa (W/cm²)not reported
In-situ Ispta (W/cm²)not reported
Protocol, in the paper’s words

Continuous-wave sonications of 40,000 cycles were delivered at this frequency using 3 driving voltages (75, 150 and 300 mVpp) in blocks, to test how success rate depended on carrier frequency; the resulting acoustic intensities are shown only in Figure 10, not stated numerically in the text.

Exposure 8: Frequency-response characterization at 600 kHz

Target: motor cortex, basal ganglia — “the basal ganglia and the motor cortex
Device: Olympus / Panametrics · Olympus · V301

Pulse timing
Waveformcontinuous
Fundamental frequency (kHz)600✓✓
Pulse duration (ms)not applicable
Pulse repetition frequency (Hz)not applicable
Duty cycle (%)not applicable
Sonication duration (s)0.0667✓✓
Pressure and intensity, by domain
Free-field pressure (kPa)not reported
Free-field Isppa (W/cm²)not reported
Free-field Ispta (W/cm²)not reported
In-situ estimatenot reported
In-situ pressure (kPa)not reported
In-situ Isppa (W/cm²)not reported
In-situ Ispta (W/cm²)not reported
Protocol, in the paper’s words

Continuous-wave sonications of 40,000 cycles were delivered at this frequency using 3 driving voltages (75, 150 and 300 mVpp) in blocks, to test how success rate depended on carrier frequency; the resulting acoustic intensities are shown only in Figure 10, not stated numerically in the text.

Flags from extraction

  • exposures[0].timing.pulse_duration_msPulse duration (0.2 ms) computed from stated cycles per pulse (100) divided by fundamental frequency (500 kHz); an explicitly permitted unit conversion, but applies only to the pulsed sub-experiments within this exposure, not the continuous-wave sub-experiments also included here.
  • exposures[0].timing.duty_cycle_pctThis exposure mixes continuous-wave (duty cycle effectively 100 percent, but not stated as a number in text) and pulsed sub-experiments; only the explicitly stated pulsed duty-cycle values are listed.
  • exposures[0].free_field.isppa_w_cm2The text does not specify whether the 0.01-79.02 W/cm2 range is spatial-peak pulse-average or spatial-peak temporal-average intensity; for the CW portion these are equal, but the exposure also includes pulsed sub-experiments where they would differ.
  • exposures[0].in_situ.pressure_kpa0.12 MPa is from a separate ex vivo mouse-skull hydrophone calibration scan used to justify ignoring skull effects, not necessarily the peak pressure delivered during any specific behavioural trial; domain correspondence to the free-field range is uncertain.
  • exposures[1-7]Acoustic intensities for the 250-450, 550 and 600 kHz frequency-response experiment are shown only in Figure 10, not given as numbers in the main text, so are recorded as not_reported.
  • auditory_controlThe paper's coupling/uncoupling control tests for an airborne-sound confound but does not match any listed auditory_control category precisely; categorized as other.
  • n_sessions_per_subjectNot stated as a single value; anesthesia-level and other sub-experiments describe blocks/visits per animal but no consistent session count is given.