Electrical stimulation vs. pulsed and continuous-wave optical stimulation of the rat prostate cavernous nerves, in vivo

William C. Perkins; Gwen A. Lagoda; Arthur Burnett; Nathaniel M. Fried

doi:10.1117/12.2183779

Electrical stimulation vs. pulsed and continuous-wave optical stimulation of the rat prostate cavernous nerves, in vivo

William C. Perkins, Gwen A. Lagoda, Arthur Burnett, Nathaniel M. Fried

School of Medicine

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Conference contribution

1 Scopus citations

Abstract

Identification and preservation of the cavernous nerves (CNs) during prostate cancer surgery is critical for post-operative sexual function. Electrical nerve stimulation (ENS) mapping has previously been tested as an intraoperative tool for CN identification, but was found to be unreliable. ENS is limited by the need for electrode-tissue contact, poor spatial precision from electrical current spreading, and stimulation artifacts interfering with detection. Alternatively, optical nerve stimulation (ONS) provides noncontact stimulation, improved spatial selectivity, and elimination of stimulation artifacts. This study compares ENS to pulsed/CW ONS to explore the ONS mechanism. A total of eighty stimulations were performed in 5 rats, in vivo. ENS (4 V, 5 ms, 10 Hz) was compared to ONS using a pulsed diode laser nerve stimulator (1873 nm, 5 ms, 10 Hz) or CW diode laser nerve stimulator (1455 nm). Intracavernous pressure (ICP) response and nerve compound action potentials (nCAPs) were measured. All three stimulation modes (ENS, ONS-CW, ONS-P) produced comparable ICP magnitudes. However, ENS demonstrated more rapid ICP response times and well defined nCAPs compared to unmeasurable nCAPs for ONS. Further experiments measuring single action potentials during ENS and ONS are warranted to further understand differences in the ENS and ONS mechanisms.

Original language	English (US)
Title of host publication	Progress in Biomedical Optics and Imaging - Proceedings of SPIE
Publisher	SPIE
Volume	9542
ISBN (Print)	9781628417074
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2183779
State	Published - 2015
Event	Medical Laser Applications and Laser Tissue Interactions VII - Munich, Germany Duration: Jun 21 2015 → Jun 23 2015

Other

Other	Medical Laser Applications and Laser Tissue Interactions VII
Country/Territory	Germany
City	Munich
Period	6/21/15 → 6/23/15

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics
Electronic, Optical and Magnetic Materials
Biomaterials
Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Access to Document

10.1117/12.2183779

Cite this

Perkins, WC, Lagoda, GA, Burnett, A & Fried, NM 2015, Electrical stimulation vs. pulsed and continuous-wave optical stimulation of the rat prostate cavernous nerves, in vivo. in Progress in Biomedical Optics and Imaging - Proceedings of SPIE. vol. 9542, 954217, SPIE, Medical Laser Applications and Laser Tissue Interactions VII, Munich, Germany, 6/21/15. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2183779

@inproceedings{2ec636239a66491191353051d0641f53,

title = "Electrical stimulation vs. pulsed and continuous-wave optical stimulation of the rat prostate cavernous nerves, in vivo",

abstract = "Identification and preservation of the cavernous nerves (CNs) during prostate cancer surgery is critical for post-operative sexual function. Electrical nerve stimulation (ENS) mapping has previously been tested as an intraoperative tool for CN identification, but was found to be unreliable. ENS is limited by the need for electrode-tissue contact, poor spatial precision from electrical current spreading, and stimulation artifacts interfering with detection. Alternatively, optical nerve stimulation (ONS) provides noncontact stimulation, improved spatial selectivity, and elimination of stimulation artifacts. This study compares ENS to pulsed/CW ONS to explore the ONS mechanism. A total of eighty stimulations were performed in 5 rats, in vivo. ENS (4 V, 5 ms, 10 Hz) was compared to ONS using a pulsed diode laser nerve stimulator (1873 nm, 5 ms, 10 Hz) or CW diode laser nerve stimulator (1455 nm). Intracavernous pressure (ICP) response and nerve compound action potentials (nCAPs) were measured. All three stimulation modes (ENS, ONS-CW, ONS-P) produced comparable ICP magnitudes. However, ENS demonstrated more rapid ICP response times and well defined nCAPs compared to unmeasurable nCAPs for ONS. Further experiments measuring single action potentials during ENS and ONS are warranted to further understand differences in the ENS and ONS mechanisms.",

author = "Perkins, {William C.} and Lagoda, {Gwen A.} and Arthur Burnett and Fried, {Nathaniel M.}",

year = "2015",

doi = "10.1117/12.2183779",

language = "English (US)",

isbn = "9781628417074",

volume = "9542",

booktitle = "Progress in Biomedical Optics and Imaging - Proceedings of SPIE",

publisher = "SPIE",

note = "Medical Laser Applications and Laser Tissue Interactions VII ; Conference date: 21-06-2015 Through 23-06-2015",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - Electrical stimulation vs. pulsed and continuous-wave optical stimulation of the rat prostate cavernous nerves, in vivo

AU - Perkins, William C.

AU - Lagoda, Gwen A.

AU - Burnett, Arthur

AU - Fried, Nathaniel M.

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - Identification and preservation of the cavernous nerves (CNs) during prostate cancer surgery is critical for post-operative sexual function. Electrical nerve stimulation (ENS) mapping has previously been tested as an intraoperative tool for CN identification, but was found to be unreliable. ENS is limited by the need for electrode-tissue contact, poor spatial precision from electrical current spreading, and stimulation artifacts interfering with detection. Alternatively, optical nerve stimulation (ONS) provides noncontact stimulation, improved spatial selectivity, and elimination of stimulation artifacts. This study compares ENS to pulsed/CW ONS to explore the ONS mechanism. A total of eighty stimulations were performed in 5 rats, in vivo. ENS (4 V, 5 ms, 10 Hz) was compared to ONS using a pulsed diode laser nerve stimulator (1873 nm, 5 ms, 10 Hz) or CW diode laser nerve stimulator (1455 nm). Intracavernous pressure (ICP) response and nerve compound action potentials (nCAPs) were measured. All three stimulation modes (ENS, ONS-CW, ONS-P) produced comparable ICP magnitudes. However, ENS demonstrated more rapid ICP response times and well defined nCAPs compared to unmeasurable nCAPs for ONS. Further experiments measuring single action potentials during ENS and ONS are warranted to further understand differences in the ENS and ONS mechanisms.

AB - Identification and preservation of the cavernous nerves (CNs) during prostate cancer surgery is critical for post-operative sexual function. Electrical nerve stimulation (ENS) mapping has previously been tested as an intraoperative tool for CN identification, but was found to be unreliable. ENS is limited by the need for electrode-tissue contact, poor spatial precision from electrical current spreading, and stimulation artifacts interfering with detection. Alternatively, optical nerve stimulation (ONS) provides noncontact stimulation, improved spatial selectivity, and elimination of stimulation artifacts. This study compares ENS to pulsed/CW ONS to explore the ONS mechanism. A total of eighty stimulations were performed in 5 rats, in vivo. ENS (4 V, 5 ms, 10 Hz) was compared to ONS using a pulsed diode laser nerve stimulator (1873 nm, 5 ms, 10 Hz) or CW diode laser nerve stimulator (1455 nm). Intracavernous pressure (ICP) response and nerve compound action potentials (nCAPs) were measured. All three stimulation modes (ENS, ONS-CW, ONS-P) produced comparable ICP magnitudes. However, ENS demonstrated more rapid ICP response times and well defined nCAPs compared to unmeasurable nCAPs for ONS. Further experiments measuring single action potentials during ENS and ONS are warranted to further understand differences in the ENS and ONS mechanisms.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84939543201&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84939543201&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1117/12.2183779

DO - 10.1117/12.2183779

M3 - Conference contribution

AN - SCOPUS:84939543201

SN - 9781628417074

VL - 9542

BT - Progress in Biomedical Optics and Imaging - Proceedings of SPIE

PB - SPIE

T2 - Medical Laser Applications and Laser Tissue Interactions VII

Y2 - 21 June 2015 through 23 June 2015

ER -

Electrical stimulation vs. pulsed and continuous-wave optical stimulation of the rat prostate cavernous nerves, in vivo

Abstract

Other

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this