Neuromodulation Technology at the Neural InterfaceNeurosciencePeer-reviewed journal article
Towards individualized deep brain stimulation: A stereoelectroencephalography-based workflow for neurostimulation target identification
Jeremy SaaliD, KELLY H. KADLECiD, Anusha B. AllawalaiD, Lucille Johnston, Ryan B. LericheiD, Ritwik VatsyayaniD, Yiyuan Han, Audrey KistiD, Tommaso Di IanniiD, Heather E. DawesiD, Edward F. ChangiD, A Moses LeeiD, Andrew D. KrystaliD, Khaled MoussawiiD, Prasad R. ShirvalkariD, Kristin K. SellersiD
Abstract
ObjectivesDeep brain stimulation (DBS) is increasingly being used to treat a variety of neuropsychiatric conditions, many of which exhibit idiosyncratic symptom presentations and neural correlates across individuals. Thus, we have utilized inpatient stereoelectroencephalography (sEEG) to identify personalized therapeutic stimulation sites for chronic implantation of DBS. Informed by our experience, we have developed a statistics-driven framework for stimulation testing to identify therapeutic targets. Materials and MethodsFourteen participants (major depressive disorder = 6, chronic pain = 6, obsessive-compulsive disorder = 2) underwent inpatient testing using sEEG and symptom monitoring to identify personalized stimulation targets for subsequent DBS implantation. We present a structured approach to this sEEG testing, integrating a Stimulation Testing Decision Tree with power analysis and effect size considerations to inform adequately powered results to detect therapeutic stimulation sites with statistical rigor. ResultsEffect sizes (Hedges g) of stimulation-induced symptom score changes ranged from -1.5 to +2.39. The standard deviation of sham trial responses was a strong predictor of stimulation response variability, as confirmed by a leave-one-out cross-validated linear regression (R2 = 0.67, permutation p<0.001). Thus, early sham trial data could be used to estimate the variability of stimulation responses for power analysis calculations. We show that approximately 10 sham trials were needed to robustly estimate sham variability. Power analysis (using a paired-t test) showed that for effect sizes [≥] 1.1, roughly 10 trials should be used per stimulation site for sufficiently powered results. ConclusionsThe presented workflow is adaptable to multiple indications and is specifically designed to overcome key challenges experienced during stimulation site testing. Through incorporating sham trials, effect size calculations, and tolerability testing, the described approach can be used to identify personalized and clinically efficacious stimulation sites.
- organism: human
- assay: electronic health records
- research focus: benchmarking
- approach: statistical model
- Citations
- 2
- FWCI
- 1.22
- Field percentile
- top 18%
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Deep Brain Stimulation: Imaging on a group level
Svenja Treu, Bryan Andrew Strange, … Andreas Horn·NeuroImagePeer-reviewed·Jun 4, 2020
- Neural Interoceptive Processing is Modulated by Deep Brain Stimulation for Treatment Resistant Depression
Elisa Xu, Samantha Pitts, … Allison C. Waters·Biological Psychiatry Cognitive Neuroscience and NeuroimagingPeer-reviewed·Nov 30, 2024
- Cortical E-fields of deep brain stimulation in Parkinson's disease patients exceed typical E-field magnitudes of transcranial electrical stimulation
Thomas Keizers, Axel Thielscher, … Bettina C. Schwab·bioRxiv·Jun 10, 2026
- A retrospective evaluation of automated optimization of deep brain stimulation parameters
J. Vorwerk, A. A. Brock, … C. R. Butson·bioRxiv·May 8, 2019
- Real-time Bayesian optimization of deep brain stimulation for personalized cognitive control enhancement
Evan M. Dastin-van Rijn, Elizabeth M. Sachse, … Alik S. Widge·bioRxiv·Dec 30, 2025
- Connectivity profile of thalamic deep brain stimulation to effectively treat essential tremor
Bassam Al‐Fatly, Siobhán Ewert, … Andrea A. Kühn·BrainPeer-reviewed·Jul 24, 2019