Mechanisms of deep brain stimulation: an intracellular study in rat thalamus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High-frequency deep brain stimulation (DBS) in the thalamus alleviates most kinds of tremor, yet its mechanism of action is unknown. Studies in subthalamic nucleus and other brain sites have emphasized non-synaptic factors. To explore the mechanism underlying thalamic DBS, we simulated DBS in vitro by applying high-frequency (125 Hz) electrical stimulation directly into the sensorimotor thalamus of adult rat brain slices. Intracellular recordings revealed two distinct types of membrane responses, both of which were initiated with a depolarization and rapid spike firing. However, type 1 responses repolarized quickly and returned to quiescent baseline during simulated DBS whereas type 2 responses maintained the level of membrane depolarization, with or without spike firing. Individual thalamic neurones exhibited either type 1 or type 2 response but not both. In all neurones tested, simulated DBS-evoked membrane depolarization was reversibly eliminated by tetrodotoxin, glutamate receptor antagonists, and the Ca(2+) channel antagonist Cd(2+). Simulated DBS also increased the excitability of thalamic cells in the presence of glutamate receptor blockade, although this non-synaptic effect induced no spontaneous firing such as that found in subthalamic nucleus neurones. Our data suggest that high-frequency stimulation when applied in the ventral thalamus can rapidly disrupt local synaptic function and neuronal firing thereby leading to a 'functional deafferentation' and/or 'functional inactivation'. These mechanisms, driven primarily by synaptic activation, help to explain the paradox that lesions, muscimol and DBS in thalamus all effectively stop tremor.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".