iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

This work demonstrates that TUS can indeed be felt, provides a roadmap for managing participant burden, and supports proper experimental blinding to enhance the validity of TUS research. Thank you to my collaborators @lennartverhagen.bsky.social, Hanneke den Ouden, Kim Butts Pauly, & Linda de Jong!

000

Interestingly, our results also provide preliminary evidence that particle displacement is a primary biophysical driving force underlying somatosensory co-stimulation. In the future, we may be able to leverage such insights to maximise CNS neuromodulatory efficacy while minimizing confounds.

120

While considering influence on CNS neuromodulation (!!), we can: - Eliminate near-field intensity peaks in the scalp - Use larger aperture areas - Apply ramping - Deliver equivalent doses via longer, lower intensity pulses - Apply higher PRFs (≥200 Hz) - Apply higher f0 (e.g., 500 vs 250 kHz)

100

How can we reduce these somatosensory confounds without compromising neuromodulation in the brain by reducing dose? Our systematic parameter mapping reveals several possible strategies:

100

All participants in our study reported feeling something during TUS. Tactile sensations like 'buzzing' and 'prickling' emerged at lower doses, with thermal and painful sensations emerging as dose increased. This poses a real challenge for blinding.

100

We applied TUS through the temples and measured participants' somatosensory experience at the stimulation site (VAS/threshold). We tested several stimulation protocols across three different transducers to identify avenues for confound mitigation.

100

Parameter optimisation for mitigating somatosensory confounds during transcranial ultrasonic stimulation

Hold on to your transducers, TUS community! We've focused on managing what participants can hear during stimulation… but how about what they feel?! Our BrainStim paper maps tactile, thermal, & painful sensations during transcranial ultrasonic stimulation - and reveals how to minimize them. Thread👇

brainstimjrnl.com

Transcranial ultrasonic stimulation (TUS) redefines what is possible with non-invasive neuromodulation by offering unparalleled spatial precision and flexible targeting capabilities. However, peripher...

183

Reposted by Benjamin Kop

Soha Farboud | So @sohafarboud.bsky.social · 02/04/2025

👀 Look to your left! Look to your right! I just 'stimulated' your frontal eye fields (FEFs)! 🧠 In our latest study, we developed a temporally precise Transcranial Ultrasonic Stimulation (TUS) protocol to modulate the human FEFs & uncover new insights into brain function!👇 doi.org/10.1101/2025...

doi.org

Rapid modulation of choice behavior by ultrasound on the human frontal eye fields

A fundamental challenge in neuroscience is establishing causal brain-function relationships with spatial and temporal precision. Transcranial ultrasonic stimulation (TUS) offers a unique opportunity t...

1106

000

100

100

How can we reduce these somatosensory confounds without compromising neuromodulation in the brain by reducing dose? Our systematic parameter mapping reveals several possible strategies:

100

100

IFCN and its Clinical Neurophysiology journal @clinicalneuroph.bsky.social · 02/03/2025

100

Reposted by Benjamin Kop

[Highlight of the Month] Murphy et al. A practical guide to transcranial ultrasonic stimulation from the IFCN-endorsed ITRUSST consortium. Clin Neurophysiol 2025;171:192-226. Open access: doi.org/10.1016/j.cl...

053

We speculate on why prior findings don’t replicate in our manuscript, but one thing is clear: double-blinding, TUS (& TMS) neuronavigation, and acoustic simulations are key to supporting the replicability required for TUS to truly make waves!

010

For those of you now concerned about using this protocol, don't worry! There are still multiple convincing studies using 5Hz-rTUS/tbTUS with promising results, so there's no need to abandon it. Instead, let's focus our efforts on reproducibility in this quickly expanding field!

100

This raises big questions: How were such consistent excitatory effects found in prior work with variable hotspot-based targeting? Particularly considering that another independent study using 5Hz-rTUS with confirmed structural targeting reported opposite (inhibitory) effects! 🤔

100

Importantly, when M1 was effectively targeted, we still didn't find evidence for offline excitatory effects!

100

We replicated the same TMS hotspot-based targeting approach for TUS as prior work, but by introducing post-hoc simulations we showed that this method can lead to unacceptable M1 targeting variability as compared to structurally/functionally informed targeting.

100

The strong & prolonged excitatory effects of 5Hz-rTUS (tbTUS) reported several times by one research group didn't replicate over APB, FDI, or ADM muscles. TUS targeting might contribute to this variability, though it cannot explain such a large discrepancy in results.

100

In this pre-registered study, we precisely replicated prior methodology, but added some key improvements: - double-blinding - TMS neuronavigation - post-hoc acoustic simulations TMS and EMG were used to capture intracortical and corticospinal excitability (SICI, ICF, & MEP).

100

Miriam Klein-Flügge 🧠 @mkflugge.bsky.social · 17/11/2024

Effects of 5Hz-rTUS (tbTUS) on corticospinal excitability are less robust than we initially thought. Check out my new preprint with @drcarysevans.bsky.social and Po-Yu Fong showing that offline excitatory TUS-TMS effects don't replicate. Thread below 👇 doi.org/10.1101/2024...

195

Reposted by Benjamin Kop

I'm still missing lots of transcranial ultrasound neuromod folks on BlueSky, so trying to create a starter pack that I hope we can add many people to in the next weeks... please spread the word and let me know who I have missed out! go.bsky.app/EjjWSUy

2105

Moving forward, amplitude modulation (ramping), improved auditory masking, and carefully constructed (active) control conditions will form the strong foundation required for TUS to realize its full potential 🚀

000

A central challenge is identifying effective and robust TUS protocols. The TUS-TMS paradigm is a common testbed in humans that has popularized the 1000 Hz and 5 Hz protocols. Such studies need proper controls to make substantiated inferences that can guide future work.

100

We applied TUS at 6.35-65 W/cm^2 free-water Isppa, at multiple pulse train durations, both with and without auditory masking. We controlled for the auditory confound through matched sound-sham and novel (in)active control conditions.

100

In this multi-center collaboration (N=67), we show that seminal online motor inhibitory effects of 1000Hz TUS are caused by indirect auditory stimulation, not direct ultrasonic neuromodulation. Even seemingly dose-dependent effects can be driven by confounds.

100