Predicting monopolar local field potential power from bipolar recordings in deep brain stimulation
Fleeting, C.; Lamp, G.; Johnson, K. A.; Cagle, J.; de Hemptinne, C.; Gunduz, A.; Wong, J.
Show abstract
ObjectivesDeep brain stimulation (DBS) is an established therapy for neurological disorders such as Parkinsons disease (PD). Modern DBS devices can record local field potentials (LFPs) to guide DBS therapy. LFPs from these devices are typically limited to bipolar configurations to suppress common-mode noise and reject artifacts. However, bipolar recordings also attenuate some local physiological signals. Methods that convert bipolar to monopolar power offer more spatially precise estimates of LFPs. Herein, we develop a model to estimate monopolar power from bipolar recordings. Materials and MethodsThis retrospective study analyzed 64 patients with PD undergoing STN (11) or GPi (53) DBS implantation. Intraoperatively, LFPs were recorded from all contacts and filtered. Bipolar montages were generated for each combination. Power spectral density (PSD) was calculated from each monopolar and bipolar signal, averaged over canonical frequency bands, and processed as log PSD. A common set of bipolar configurations was selected to minimize the Condition Number (CN), maximizing model stability. Monopolar and bipolar powers were related using robust OLS regression. Observations were randomly partitioned into training and validation sets. ResultsSixty-four PD patients yielded 640 observations. The configuration group with the lowest CN (7.45) was {C03, C12, C23}. The models demonstrated adjusted R2s of 0.9015, 0.9055, 0.8853, and 0.8764, and RMSEs (dB) of 3.2663, 3.2801, 3.5815, and 3.7035 when predicting C0, C1, C2, and C3 (N = 500; all p < 0.0001). The STN, GPi, and combined cohorts performed comparably. Weights transferred from the combined model to the validation set retained high performance. ConclusionsThis study demonstrates that monopolar LFP power can be accurately estimated from bipolar power using a linear regression model with strong generalizability across targets and validation sets. This approach offers a hardware-agnostic solution to spatially disambiguate signals and better inform DBS programming and adaptive stimulation in chronically implanted devices.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Towards adaptive deep brain stimulation: clinical and technical notes on a novel commercial device for chronic brain sensing 95%
- Automated optimization of deep brain stimulation parameters for modulating neuroimaging-based targets 94%
- A retrospective evaluation of automated optimization of deep brain stimulation parameters 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Electrophysiological Correlates of Dynamic Cycling in Parkinson’s Disease 95%
- Neurofeedback-enabled beta power control with a fully implanted DBS system in patients with Parkinson’s disease 95%
- Optimizing automated detection of high frequency oscillations using visual markings does not improve SOZ localization 93%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Online prediction of optimal deep brain stimulation contacts from local field potentials in chronically-implanted patients with Parkinson’s disease 96%
- DBScope: a versatile computational toolbox for the visualization and analysis of sensing data from Deep Brain Stimulation 95%
- Long-term effects of directional deep brain stimulation in Parkinson's disease: a randomized clinical trial on motor and non-motor symptoms 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Proper reference selection and re-referencing to mitigate bias in single pulse electrical stimulation data 93%
- A convolutional-recurrent neural network approach to resting-state EEG classification in Parkinson’s disease 92%
- A biophysically constrained brain connectivity model based on stimulation-evoked potentials. 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.