Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
203,234 studies31 sourcesUpdated 15 min ago
PreprintCC BY-NDmedRxiv

Post-implantation 3-T MRI in patients with an epicranial stimulation device: image quality and deep learning-based electrode reconstruction

  1. 1Division of Medical Physics, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, University Medical Center Freiburg, University of Freib

Abstract

We evaluated structural and functional MRI at 3 T in five patients with an implanted EASEE focal cortex stimulation system and assessed MRI-only electrode reconstruction. Image quality was evaluated visually and by comparing implant-centered and control regions using structural GM/WM signal ratios, GE-EPI signal intensity, T2*, and relative off-resonance. A deep learning pipeline trained exclusively on synthetic data estimated electrode position from T1-weighted MPRAGE images. Structural and functional acquisitions were completed in all patients without scan-related adverse events. Structural images showed clear intracranial anatomy beneath the implant without visually apparent local signal loss or distortion. GE-EPI reference images and derived maps showed no consistent local disturbance corresponding to the electrode. GE-EPI signal was numerically lower in implant-centered regions, but no imaging metric differed significantly between regions (all p > 0.05). Electrode reconstructions were anatomically plausible in all patients, with patient-specific median central electrode-to-cortical gray-matter distances ranging from 9 to 20 mm. These findings demonstrate the feasibility of post-implantation structural and functional MRI and MRI-only estimation of electrode-cortex geometry, although localization accuracy remains unvalidated. This combination provides a basis for future studies integrating patient-specific electrode geometry, electric-field modeling, and functional connectivity analyses in focal cortex stimulation with the EASEE system.

Related

  1. Perception gaps between patients and practitioners regarding safety, data security, and ethics of intracranial electrode implantation: a multi-center study
    Zixiao Yin, Guanyu Zhu, Tianqi Hu +8
    BMC MedicinePeer-reviewedCC BY-NC-ND 4.0Full textNeurologyPMC
  2. Adaptive Cellular Responsiveness to Electrical Stimulation at the Skin‐Electrode Interface
    Yeon Jae Chang, Soon Jin Choi, Khandoker Asiqur Rahaman +9
    Advanced SciencePeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textGeneral medicinePMC
  3. Biodegradable Vascular Patches for Arterial Reconstruction: In Vitro Study and Long-Term Implantation in a Sheep Model
    Ekaterina Prokudina, Eugenia Senokosova, Larisa Antonova +10
    BiomedicinesPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textGeneral medicineEurope PMC
  4. Unsupervised electrophysiological localization of dorsolateral-associated STN activity using an attention-based contrastive VAE for optimal deep brain stimulation electrode placement in Parkinson’s disease
    Bhavna Bajpai, Shubham Sharma, Alfredo Rosado
    Neuroscience InformaticsPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textNeurologyDOAJ
  5. Pacemaker Dependency in Patients Undergoing Implantation of Dual-chamber Devices After Alcohol Septum Ablation: A Retrospective Analysis
    Sophia Schulze Lammers, Dennis Lawin, Annika Hoyer +2
    CJC openPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textCardiovascular medicineEurope PMC
BibTeX
@misc{schwaderlapp2026postimplantation,
  title = {{Post-implantation 3-T MRI in patients with an epicranial stimulation device: image quality and deep learning-based electrode reconstruction}},
  author = {N. Schwaderlapp and A. Barghoorn and S. Kalousios and M. Duempelmann and E. Martinez-Lizana and N. Zabler and B. Steinhoff and V. Dinkelacker and M. Zaitsev and A. Schulze-Bonhage},
  howpublished = {medRxiv},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.64898/2026.10.27.26366576},
  url = {https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.10.27.26366576v1},
  note = {CC BY-ND},
}
RIS
TY  - UNPB
TI  - Post-implantation 3-T MRI in patients with an epicranial stimulation device: image quality and deep learning-based electrode reconstruction
AU  - N. Schwaderlapp
AU  - A. Barghoorn
AU  - S. Kalousios
AU  - M. Duempelmann
AU  - E. Martinez-Lizana
AU  - N. Zabler
AU  - B. Steinhoff
AU  - V. Dinkelacker
AU  - M. Zaitsev
AU  - A. Schulze-Bonhage
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/27
PB  - medRxiv
DO  - 10.64898/2026.10.27.26366576
UR  - https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.10.27.26366576v1
AB  - We evaluated structural and functional MRI at 3 T in five patients with an implanted EASEE focal cortex stimulation system and assessed MRI-only electrode reconstruction. Image quality was evaluated visually and by comparing implant-centered and control regions using structural GM/WM signal ratios, GE-EPI signal intensity, T2*, and relative off-resonance. A deep learning pipeline trained exclusively on synthetic data estimated electrode position from T1-weighted MPRAGE images. Structural and functional acquisitions were completed in all patients without scan-related adverse events. Structural images showed clear intracranial anatomy beneath the implant without visually apparent local signal loss or distortion. GE-EPI reference images and derived maps showed no consistent local disturbance corresponding to the electrode. GE-EPI signal was numerically lower in implant-centered regions, but no imaging metric differed significantly between regions (all p > 0.05). Electrode reconstructions were anatomically plausible in all patients, with patient-specific median central electrode-to-cortical gray-matter distances ranging from 9 to 20 mm. These findings demonstrate the feasibility of post-implantation structural and functional MRI and MRI-only estimation of electrode-cortex geometry, although localization accuracy remains unvalidated. This combination provides a basis for future studies integrating patient-specific electrode geometry, electric-field modeling, and functional connectivity analyses in focal cortex stimulation with the EASEE system.
ER  -