Skip to main content
Journal cover image

The rationale driving the evolution of deep brain stimulation to constant-current devices.

Publication ,  Journal Article
Bronstein, JM; Tagliati, M; McIntyre, C; Chen, R; Cheung, T; Hargreaves, EL; Israel, Z; Moffitt, M; Montgomery, EB; Stypulkowski, P; Shils, J ...
Published in: Neuromodulation
February 2015

OBJECTIVE: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is an effective therapy for the treatment of a number of movement and neuropsychiatric disorders. The effectiveness of DBS is dependent on the density and location of stimulation in a given brain area. Adjustments are made to optimize clinical benefits and minimize side effects. Until recently, clinicians would adjust DBS settings using a voltage mode, where the delivered voltage remained constant. More recently, a constant-current mode has become available where the programmer sets the current and the stimulator automatically adjusts the voltage as impedance changes. METHODS: We held an expert consensus meeting to evaluate the current state of the literature and field on constant-current mode versus voltage mode in clinical brain-related applications. RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS: There has been little reporting of the use of constant-current DBS devices in movement and neuropsychiatric disorders. However, as impedance varies considerably between patients and over time, it makes sense that all new devices will likely use constant current.

Duke Scholars

Published In

Neuromodulation

DOI

EISSN

1525-1403

Publication Date

February 2015

Volume

18

Issue

2

Start / End Page

85 / 88

Location

United States

Related Subject Headings

  • Time Factors
  • Neurology & Neurosurgery
  • Humans
  • Electric Impedance
  • Deep Brain Stimulation
  • Brain Diseases
  • Brain
  • Biophysical Phenomena
  • 3209 Neurosciences
  • 3202 Clinical sciences
 

Citation

APA
Chicago
ICMJE
MLA
NLM
Bronstein, J. M., Tagliati, M., McIntyre, C., Chen, R., Cheung, T., Hargreaves, E. L., … Okun, M. S. (2015). The rationale driving the evolution of deep brain stimulation to constant-current devices. Neuromodulation, 18(2), 85–88. https://doi.org/10.1111/ner.12227
Bronstein, Jeff M., Michele Tagliati, Cameron McIntyre, Robert Chen, Tyler Cheung, Eric L. Hargreaves, Zvi Israel, et al. “The rationale driving the evolution of deep brain stimulation to constant-current devices.Neuromodulation 18, no. 2 (February 2015): 85–88. https://doi.org/10.1111/ner.12227.
Bronstein JM, Tagliati M, McIntyre C, Chen R, Cheung T, Hargreaves EL, et al. The rationale driving the evolution of deep brain stimulation to constant-current devices. Neuromodulation. 2015 Feb;18(2):85–8.
Bronstein, Jeff M., et al. “The rationale driving the evolution of deep brain stimulation to constant-current devices.Neuromodulation, vol. 18, no. 2, Feb. 2015, pp. 85–88. Pubmed, doi:10.1111/ner.12227.
Bronstein JM, Tagliati M, McIntyre C, Chen R, Cheung T, Hargreaves EL, Israel Z, Moffitt M, Montgomery EB, Stypulkowski P, Shils J, Denison T, Vitek J, Volkman J, Wertheimer J, Okun MS. The rationale driving the evolution of deep brain stimulation to constant-current devices. Neuromodulation. 2015 Feb;18(2):85–88.
Journal cover image

Published In

Neuromodulation

DOI

EISSN

1525-1403

Publication Date

February 2015

Volume

18

Issue

2

Start / End Page

85 / 88

Location

United States

Related Subject Headings

  • Time Factors
  • Neurology & Neurosurgery
  • Humans
  • Electric Impedance
  • Deep Brain Stimulation
  • Brain Diseases
  • Brain
  • Biophysical Phenomena
  • 3209 Neurosciences
  • 3202 Clinical sciences