Thalamic transcranial ultrasound stimulation in treatment resistant depression
Joline M. Fan, Kai Woodworth, Keith R. Murphy, Leighton Hinkley, Joshua L. Cohen, Joanne Yoshimura, Inhauck Choi, Alexandra G. Tremblay-McGaw, Joncarmen Mergenthaler, Cameron H. Good, Peter A. Pellionisz, A.Moses Lee, Tommaso Di Ianni, Leo P. Sugrue, Andrew D. Krystal
Brain Stimulation 2024, 17, 1001-1004 · 10.1016/j.brs.2024.08.006
Exposures
Exposure 1: VC/BNST dynamically-steered TUS
Target: internal capsule, other — “ventral capsule (VC) / bed nucleus of stria terminalis (BNST)”
Device: Attune · Attune Neurosciences, Inc. · ATTN201 ✓
| Waveform | pulsed | |
|---|---|---|
| Fundamental frequency (kHz) | 500 | ✓✓✓ |
| Pulse duration (ms) | not reportedimplied by duty cycle ÷ PRF: 5.2 ms (not stated by the paper) | |
| Pulse repetition frequency (Hz) | 25 | ✓✓✓ |
| Duty cycle (%) | 13 | ✓✓✓ |
| Sonication duration (s) | 300 | ✓✓✓ |
| Free-field pressure (kPa) | not reported | |
|---|---|---|
| Free-field Isppa (W/cm²) | not reported | |
| Free-field Ispta (W/cm²) | not reported | |
| In-situ estimate | simulationsingle value | |
| In-situ pressure (kPa) | not reported | |
| In-situ Isppa (W/cm²) | 42.2, 50.2swept | ✓✓✓⚑ |
| In-situ Ispta (W/cm²) | not reported |
Stimulation was bilateral, alternating between left and right lateralized regions every 15 minutes, i.e. 10 min inter pulse train interval. Eight total pulse trains (four left and four right) were performed to complete a full session; each followed by a 24-hr washout period.
Exposure 2: ANT dynamically-steered TUS
Target: anterior thalamic nucleus — “anterior nucleus of the thalamus (ANT)”
Device: Attune · Attune Neurosciences, Inc. · ATTN201 ✓
| Waveform | pulsed | |
|---|---|---|
| Fundamental frequency (kHz) | 500 | ✓✓✓ |
| Pulse duration (ms) | not reportedimplied by duty cycle ÷ PRF: 5.2 ms (not stated by the paper) | |
| Pulse repetition frequency (Hz) | 25 | ✓✓✓ |
| Duty cycle (%) | 13 | ✓✓✓ |
| Sonication duration (s) | 300 | ✓✓✓ |
| Free-field pressure (kPa) | not reported | |
|---|---|---|
| Free-field Isppa (W/cm²) | not reported | |
| Free-field Ispta (W/cm²) | not reported | |
| In-situ estimate | simulationsingle value | |
| In-situ pressure (kPa) | not reported | |
| In-situ Isppa (W/cm²) | 42.2, 50.2swept | ✓✓✓ |
| In-situ Ispta (W/cm²) | not reported |
Stimulation was bilateral, alternating between left and right lateralized regions every 15 minutes, i.e. 10 min inter pulse train interval. Eight total pulse trains (four left and four right) were performed to complete a full session; each followed by a 24-hr washout period.
Flags from extraction
n_subjects— Single-subject case report.sham_type— Unfocused control delivers the same acoustic energy at the array surface without a deep-brain focal pattern; does not clearly match inactive_transducer, active_control_site or sound_only, so classified as other.exposures[0].target— VC and BNST were reported together as a combined 'VC/BNST' condition in the results and figures; treated as one exposure. VC mapped to internal_capsule (ventral capsule/ALIC synonym) and BNST has no matching target id, mapped to other.exposures[0].in_situ.isppa_w_cm2— The 42.2-50.2 W/cm2 range is reported for 'active conditions' generally (right-lateralized regions) rather than separately for each of VC/BNST vs ANT; applied to both exposures as the paper does not give per-target values.n_sessions_per_subject— Paper describes an exploratory phase, serial testing of three regions over multiple days, and top-candidate vs unfocused comparison, but does not state a single total number of sessions per condition.blinding— Paper states resting-state fMRI was collected following 'double-blinded ANT stimulation' but does not otherwise describe the blinding scheme for the full study.