Worrell, Gregory A.

AbstractObjectiveHigh‐frequency oscillations are considered among the most promising interictal biomarkers of the epileptogenic zone in patients suffering from pharmacoresistant focal epilepsy. However, there is no clear definition of pathological high‐frequency oscillations, and the existing detectors vary in methodology, performance, and computational costs. This study proposes relative entropy as an easy‐to‐use novel interictal biomarker of the epileptic tissue.MethodsWe evaluated relative entropy and high‐frequency oscillation biomarkers on intracranial electroencephalographic data from 39 patients with seizure‐free postoperative outcome (Engel Ia) from three institutions. We tested their capability to localize the epileptogenic zone, defined as resected contacts located in the seizure onset zone. The performance was compared using areas under the receiver operating curves (AUROCs) and precision‐recall curves. Then we tested whether a universal threshold can be used to delineate the epileptogenic zone across patients from different institutions.ResultsRelative entropy in the ripple band (80–250 Hz) achieved an average AUROC of .85. The normalized high‐frequency oscillation rate in the ripple band showed an identical AUROC of .85. In contrast to high‐frequency oscillations, relative entropy did not require any patient‐level normalization and was easy and fast to calculate due to its clear and straightforward definition. One threshold could be set across different patients and institutions, because relative entropy is independent of signal amplitude and sampling frequency.SignificanceAlthough both relative entropy and high‐frequency oscillations have a similar performance, relative entropy has significant advantages such as straightforward definition, computational speed, and universal interpatient threshold, making it an easy‐to‐use promising biomarker of the epileptogenic zone.

Abstract Modulation of cognitive functions supporting human declarative memory is one of the grand challenges of neuroscience, and of vast importance for a variety of neuropsychiatric, neurodegenerative and neurodevelopmental diseases. Despite a recent surge of successful attempts at improving performance in a range of memory tasks, the optimal approaches and parameters for memory enhancement have yet to be determined. On a more fundamental level, it remains elusive as to how delivering electrical current in a given brain area leads to enhanced memory processing. Starting from the local and distal physiological effects on neural populations, the mechanisms of enhanced memory encoding, maintenance, consolidation or recall in response to direct electrical stimulation are only now being unravelled. With the advent of innovative neurotechnologies for concurrent recording and stimulation intracranially in the human brain, it becomes possible to study both acute and chronic effects of stimulation on memory performance and the underlying neural activities. In this review, we summarize the effects of various invasive stimulation approaches for modulating memory functions. We first outline the challenges that were faced in the initial studies of memory enhancement and the lessons learnt. Electrophysiological biomarkers are then reviewed as more objective measures of the stimulation effects than behavioural outcomes. Finally, we classify the various stimulation approaches into continuous and phasic modulation with an open or closed loop for responsive stimulation based on analysis of the recorded neural activities. Although the potential advantage of closed-loop responsive stimulation over the classic open-loop approaches is inconclusive, we foresee the emerging results from ongoing longitudinal studies and clinical trials will shed light on both the mechanisms and optimal strategies for improving declarative memory. Adaptive stimulation based on the biomarker analysis over extended periods of time is proposed as a future direction for obtaining lasting effects on memory functions. Chronic tracking and modulation of neural activities intracranially through adaptive stimulation opens tantalizing new avenues to continually monitor and treat memory and cognitive deficits in a range of brain disorders. Brain co-processors created with machine-learning tools and wireless bi-directional connectivity to seamlessly integrate implanted devices with smartphones and cloud computing are poised to enable real-time automated analysis of large data volumes and adaptively tune electrical stimulation based on electrophysiological biomarkers of behavioural states. Next-generation implantable devices for high-density recording and stimulation of electrophysiological activities, and technologies for distributed brain–computer interfaces are presented as selected future perspectives for modulating human memory and associated mental processes.

Abstract Deep brain stimulation and responsive neurostimulation (RNS) use high‐frequency stimulation (HFS) per the pivotal trials and manufacturer‐recommended therapy protocols. However, not all patients respond to HFS. In this retrospective case series, 10 patients implanted with the RNS System were programmed with low‐frequency stimulation (LFS) to treat their seizures; nine of these patients were previously treated with HFS (100 Hz or greater). LFS was defined as frequency < 10 Hz. Burst duration was increased to at least 1000 ms. With HFS, patients had a median seizure reduction (MSR) of 13% (interquartile range [IQR] = −67 to 54) after a median of 19 months (IQR = 8–49). In contrast, LFS was associated with a 67% MSR (IQR = 13–95) when compared to HFS and 76% MSR (IQR = 43–91) when compared to baseline prior to implantation. Charge delivered per hour and pulses per day were not significantly different between HFS and LFS, although time stimulated per day was longer for LFS (228 min) than for HFS (7 min). There were no LFS‐specific adverse effects reported by any of the patients. LFS could represent an alternative, effective method for delivering stimulation in focal drug‐resistant epilepsy patients treated with the RNS System.

AbstractLoss of consciousness is a hallmark of many epileptic seizures and carries risks of serious injury and sudden death. While cortical sleep-like activities accompany loss of consciousness during focal impaired awareness seizures, the mechanisms of loss of consciousness during focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures remain unclear. Quantifying differences in markers of cortical activation and ictal recruitment between focal impaired awareness and focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures may also help us to understand their different consequences for clinical outcomes and to optimize neuromodulation therapies.We quantified clinical signs of loss of consciousness and intracranial EEG activity during 129 focal impaired awareness and 50 focal to bilateral tonic-clonic from 41 patients. We characterized intracranial EEG changes both in the seizure onset zone and in areas remote from the seizure onset zone with a total of 3386 electrodes distributed across brain areas. First, we compared the dynamics of intracranial EEG sleep-like activities: slow-wave activity (1–4 Hz) and beta/delta ratio (a validated marker of cortical activation) during focal impaired awareness versus focal to bilateral tonic-clonic. Second, we quantified differences between focal to bilateral tonic-clonic and focal impaired awareness for a marker validated to detect ictal cross-frequency coupling: phase-locked high gamma (high-gamma phased-locked to low frequencies) and a marker of ictal recruitment: the epileptogenicity index. Third, we assessed changes in intracranial EEG activity preceding and accompanying behavioural generalization onset and their correlation with electromyogram channels. In addition, we analysed human cortical multi-unit activity recorded with Utah arrays during three focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures.Compared to focal impaired awareness, focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures were characterized by deeper loss of consciousness, even before generalization occurred. Unlike during focal impaired awareness, early loss of consciousness before generalization was accompanied by paradoxical decreases in slow-wave activity and by increases in high-gamma activity in parieto-occipital and temporal cortex. After generalization, when all patients displayed loss of consciousness, stronger increases in slow-wave activity were observed in parieto-occipital cortex, while more widespread increases in cortical activation (beta/delta ratio), ictal cross-frequency coupling (phase-locked high gamma) and ictal recruitment (epileptogenicity index). Behavioural generalization coincided with a whole-brain increase in high-gamma activity, which was especially synchronous in deep sources and could not be explained by EMG. Similarly, multi-unit activity analysis of focal to bilateral tonic-clonic revealed sustained increases in cortical firing rates during and after generalization onset in areas remote from the seizure onset zone.Overall, these results indicate that unlike during focal impaired awareness, the neural signatures of loss of consciousness during focal to bilateral tonic-clonic consist of paradoxical increases in cortical activation and neuronal firing found most consistently in posterior brain regions. These findings suggest differences in the mechanisms of ictal loss of consciousness between focal impaired awareness and focal to bilateral tonic-clonic and may account for the more negative prognostic consequences of focal to bilateral tonic-clonic.