Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2022 Apr 25:16:872639.
doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2022.872639. eCollection 2022.

Current State of Potential Mechanisms Supporting Low Intensity Focused Ultrasound for Neuromodulation

Affiliations
Review

Current State of Potential Mechanisms Supporting Low Intensity Focused Ultrasound for Neuromodulation

John Dell'Italia et al. Front Hum Neurosci. .

Abstract

Low intensity focused ultrasound (LIFU) has been gaining traction as a non-invasive neuromodulation technology due to its superior spatial specificity relative to transcranial electrical/magnetic stimulation. Despite a growing literature of LIFU-induced behavioral modifications, the mechanisms of action supporting LIFU's parameter-dependent excitatory and suppressive effects are not fully understood. This review provides a comprehensive introduction to the underlying mechanics of both acoustic energy and neuronal membranes, defining the primary variables for a subsequent review of the field's proposed mechanisms supporting LIFU's neuromodulatory effects. An exhaustive review of the empirical literature was also conducted and studies were grouped based on the sonication parameters used and behavioral effects observed, with the goal of linking empirical findings to the proposed theoretical mechanisms and evaluating which model best fits the existing data. A neuronal intramembrane cavitation excitation model, which accounts for differential effects as a function of cell-type, emerged as a possible explanation for the range of excitatory effects found in the literature. The suppressive and other findings need additional theoretical mechanisms and these theoretical mechanisms need to have established relationships to sonication parameters.

Keywords: focused ultrasound stimulation; low intensity focused ultrasound; neuromodulation; non-invasive brain stimulation; transcranial focused ultrasound.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

AB is founder and major stockholder of Brainsonix Corp. and is a patent holder in the field of FUS brainstimulation. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Low intensity focused ultrasound general principles. (A) A depiction of a typical LIFU experimental setup. A participant is seated (2) with an US device (5) firmly pressed against their head held in place by an arm (3). The US device is controlled by a computer system (4) and targeted using infrared system (1). (B) Depiction of the mechanical wave properties (amplitude, wavelength, and frequency) used in US stimulation. (C) Spatial intensities of the mechanical wave. (D) Temporal intensities of the mechanical wave. (E) Two exemplary pulsation schemes: pulsed (in yellow) and continuous (in teal). Both the pulsing schemes have a customizable sonication duration with inter stimulation interval with the DC parameter (i.e., the ratio of tone burst duration over pulse repetition period) determining the pulsing scheme.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Proposed ultrasonic stimulation's mechanisms for neuromodulation. Depicted in column 1 are six neuronal membranes (four with an ion channel [rows A,C,D,E] and two neuronal membranes [rows B,F] with polar lipid bilayer) and a neuron with the microtubules highlighted (row G). Depicted in column 2, these membranes have four types of electrophysiological-mechanical coupling during an action potential: change in membrane conformation state, thermodynamic waves, direct flexoelectricity, and opening of mechanosensitive ion channels (see Section above). Column 3 depicts these same four electrophysiological-mechanical coupling during US stimulation along with three other possible mechanisms of US's neuromodulation: thermal modulation, sonoporation and cavitation, and microtubule resonance (see Section above).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Neuronal intramembrane cavitation excitation model. Plaksin et al. (2014, 2016) proposed the NICE model hypothesizing sonoporation (see Section above and Figure 2F) as US's mechanism of neuromodulation. The US's DC (see Figure 1E) determines the polarity of neuromodulation. A low DC (i.e., below 5%) during a stimulation's off-periods will preferentially activate thalamic reticular neurons (TRN), thalamocortical neurons (TCN), and low-threshold spiking (LTS) interneurons via T-type voltage-gated calcium channels (see Section above for full description) producing an inhibitory effect. A high DC (i.e., over 20%) during the on-periods will preferentially activate regular spiking (RS) pyramidal cells and fast spiking (FS) interneurons while suppressing the LTS interneurons producing an overall excitatory effect. This excitatory effect is simulated using a basic network model of LTS, FS, and RS neurons connected with excitatory and inhibitory synapses and thalamic inputs. The network model predicts an optimum excitation of 70% DC.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Excitatory and suppressive empirical findings' relationships to DC, PRF, ISPPA, fc, and SD. DC, PRF, ISPPA, fc, and SD are used as grouping factors for excitatory and suppressive findings. We used density plots for each study, but studies with multiple sonication parameters have each one plotted. In the top panel, high DC, above 10%, has the vast majority of the excitatory findings. While ow DC, less than 10%, contains the majority of the suppressive findings, there are still approximately 30% of the suppressive findings above 10% DC. The top panel is highlighted in red because DC is the one sonication parameter that has any distinction between excitatory and suppressive findings. In the four bottom panels, PRF, ISPPA, fc, and SD has no clear distinction between excitatory and suppressive findings.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Ahmadpoor F., Sharma P. (2015). Flexoelectricity in two-dimensional crystalline and biological membranes. Nanoscale 7, 16555–16570. 10.1039/C5NR04722F - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ai L., Bansal P., Mueller J. K., Legon W. (2018). Effects of transcranial focused ultrasound on human primary motor cortex using 7T fMRI: a pilot study. BMC Neurosci. 19, 56. 10.1186/s12868-018-0456-6 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ai L., Mueller J. K., Grant A., Eryaman Y., Legon W. (2016). Transcranial focused ultrasound for BOLD fMRI signal modulation in humans, in 2016 38th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (Orlando, FL: IEEE; ), 1758–1761. 10.1109/EMBC.2016.7591057 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cain J. A., Visagan S., Johnson M. A., Crone J., Blades R., Spivak N. M., et al. . (2021). Real time and delayed effects of subcortical low intensity focused ultrasound. Sci. Rep. 11, 1–14. 10.1038/s41598-021-85504-y - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Chen H., Garcia-Gonzalez D., Jérusalem A. (2019). Computational model of the mechanoelectrophysiological coupling in axons with application to neuromodulation. Phys. Rev. E 99, 032406. 10.1103/PhysRevE.99.032406 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources