S. Meijs, S. Sørensen, K. Rechendorff, N. Rijkhoff
{"title":"In Vivo Charge Injection Limits Increased after 'Unsafe' Stimulation","authors":"S. Meijs, S. Sørensen, K. Rechendorff, N. Rijkhoff","doi":"10.5220/0005606301010105","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The effect of unsafe stimulation on charge injection limits (Qinj) and pulsing capacitance (Cpulse) was investigated. Four stimulation protocols were applied: 20 mA – 200 and 400 Hz, 50 mA – 200 and 400 Hz. Increasing Qinj and Cpulse were observed for all stimulation protocols. Corrosion was not observed with any of the stimulation protocols and no tissue damage was observed for the 20 mA – 200 Hz stimulation group. This indicates that the ‘safe potential window’ may not be applicable in vivo, as no damage was done stimulating with 20 mA at 200 Hz, while damage was done using the same current at 400 Hz.","PeriodicalId":167011,"journal":{"name":"International Congress on Neurotechnology, Electronics and Informatics","volume":"160 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Congress on Neurotechnology, Electronics and Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5220/0005606301010105","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The effect of unsafe stimulation on charge injection limits (Qinj) and pulsing capacitance (Cpulse) was investigated. Four stimulation protocols were applied: 20 mA – 200 and 400 Hz, 50 mA – 200 and 400 Hz. Increasing Qinj and Cpulse were observed for all stimulation protocols. Corrosion was not observed with any of the stimulation protocols and no tissue damage was observed for the 20 mA – 200 Hz stimulation group. This indicates that the ‘safe potential window’ may not be applicable in vivo, as no damage was done stimulating with 20 mA at 200 Hz, while damage was done using the same current at 400 Hz.
研究了不安全刺激对充注限(Qinj)和脉冲电容(Cpulse)的影响。采用了四种刺激方案:20 mA - 200和400 Hz, 50 mA - 200和400 Hz。在所有刺激方案中,均观察到沁气和脉冲量增加。任何刺激方案均未观察到腐蚀,20 mA - 200 Hz刺激组未观察到组织损伤。这表明“安全电位窗口”可能不适用于体内,因为用200hz的20ma电流刺激不会造成损伤,而使用400hz的相同电流则会造成损伤。