The patent's assignee for patent number 8781598 is
News editors obtained the following quote from the background information supplied by the inventors: "Implantable stimulation devices are devices that generate and deliver electrical stimuli to body nerves and tissues for the therapy of various biological disorders, such as pacemakers to treat cardiac arrhythmia, defibrillators to treat cardiac fibrillation, cochlear stimulators to treat deafness, retinal stimulators to treat blindness, muscle stimulators to produce coordinated limb movement, spinal cord stimulators to treat chronic pain, cortical and deep brain stimulators to treat motor and psychological disorders, and other neural stimulators to treat urinary incontinence, sleep apnea, shoulder sublaxation, etc. The present invention may find applicability in all such applications, although the description that follows will generally focus on the use of the invention within a spinal cord stimulation system, such as that disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 6,516,227 ('the '227 patent'), issued
"Spinal cord stimulation is a well-accepted clinical method for reducing pain in certain populations of patients. A Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) system typically includes an Implantable Pulse Generator (IPG) or Radio-Frequency (RF) transmitter and receiver, electrodes, at least one electrode lead, and, optionally, at least one electrode lead extension. The electrodes, which reside on a distal end of the electrode lead, are typically implanted along the dura of the spinal cord, and the IPG or RF transmitter generates electrical pulses that are delivered through the electrodes to the nerve fibers within the spinal column. Individual electrode contacts (the 'electrodes') are arranged in a desired pattern and spacing to create an electrode array. Individual wires within one or more electrode leads connect with each electrode in the array. The electrode lead(s) exit the spinal column and generally attach to one or more electrode lead extensions. The electrode lead extensions, in turn, are typically tunneled around the torso of the patient to a subcutaneous pocket where the IPG or RF receiver is implanted. Alternatively, the electrode lead may directly connect with the IPG or RF receiver. For examples of other SCS systems and other stimulation system, see U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,646,940 and 3,822,708, which are hereby incorporated by reference in their entireties. Of course, implantable pulse generators are active devices requiring energy for operation, such as is provided by an implanted battery or an external power source.
"An IPG may include one or more output current sources/sinks that are configured to supply/receive stimulating current to/from the electrodes on the IPG, and ultimately to/from the patient's tissue. For example, FIG. 1 shows a basic output current source 500 and a corresponding output current sink 501 used to stimulate tissue, exemplified generically as a load 505 ®. As one skilled in the art will understand, transistors M1 and M3 in the output current source 500, and transistors M2 and M4 in the output current sink 501, comprise a current mirror. The current mirrors operates to mirror a reference current, I.sub.ref, in the output stage of the current source or sink, i.e., I.sub.out=I.sub.ref. The reference current I.sub.ref can also be scaled by providing paralleled numbers (M) of output transistors (i.e., M1 and M2), such that I.sub.out=M*I.sub.ref. Selection of the various current sources or sinks is typically provided by selection transistors 513 and 513'. As already alluded to, an IPG typically has several electrodes, and the various current sources and sinks can be controlled to source or sink current to any particular electrode, E, as is efficacious for treating a particular patient. As shown in FIG. 1, the current source 500 is connected to IPG electrode E.sub.X while the current sink is connected to electrode E.sub.Y.
"The output current sources and sinks 500, 501, as one can notice from FIG. 1, are typically formed of transistors of differing polarities. Thus, the sources 500 are formed from P-channel transistors, while the sinks 501 are formed from N-channel transistors. Without a full discussion of transistor physics, one skilled will recognize that use of transistors of such polarities is sensible, given that the sources 500 are typically tied to a positive voltage (V+, referred to herein as the 'compliance voltage'), while the sources 501 are typically tied to a more negative voltage, such as ground. (A 'ground voltage' as used herein should be understood as any reference voltage with respect to the compliance voltage). (The substrate connection (not shown) for the transistors would typically be tied to the appropriate power supply, either V+ or ground, but could also be tied to the transistors' sources). Because the current sources and sinks 500 and 501 are generally digitally controllable as will be seen (e.g., by transistors 513, 513'), to produce output currents I.sub.out of a desired amplitude, such current sources and sinks are typically referred to as Digital-to-Analog Converter circuitry, or 'DAC' circuitry. More specifically, in reference to the polarity of the transistors in each, the current sources 500 are typically referred to as 'PDACs,' while the current sinks 501 are typically referred to as 'NDACs.'
"Different output source/sink architectures can be used in an IPG, and are shown in FIGS. 2-4 respectively. The architecture shown in FIGS. 2A-2B is disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 6,181,969, which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety. As shown in FIG. 2A, in the architecture of the '969 patent, each electrode E.sub.X has its own dedicated PDAC and NDAC circuitry, which allows that electrode to either operate as a source of sink of current, or neither. As shown, the PDAC (current source) associated with electrode E.sub.2 is active, while the NDAC (current sink) associated with electrode E.sub.3 is active, thus producing the current path shown. FIG. 2B shows the PDAC circuitry for a particular electrode useable in the architecture of FIG. 2A. (Only the PDAC circuitry is shown, but one skilled in the art will recognize that the NDAC circuitry for a given electrode would be similarly formed of N-channel devices). As shown, and as one skilled will appreciate, selection transistors 513 are used to digitally set the amplitude of the current to be sourced at electrode E.sub.X (i.e., electrode E.sub.2 of FIG. 2A) from I.sub.ref to 127 I.sub.ref in increments of I.sub.ref. As this is explained in detail in the above-incorporated '969 patent, it is not further discussed.
"The current architecture of FIGS. 3A-3B is disclosed in above-incorporated U.S. Pat. No. 6,516,227. This architecture is similar to that of FIGS. 2A-2B in that a number of discrete PDAC current source circuitry blocks and NDAC current sink circuitry blocks are provided. However, the PDACs and NDACs are not dedicated to any particular electrode, and instead, each PDAC and NDAC can be coupled to any given electrode via a low-impedance switching matrix, which in reality contains a number of switches to accomplish this task.
"Another current sourcing and sinking architecture is disclosed in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/177,503, filed
"Regardless of the current source/sink architecture used, all generally have similar current output path characteristics. That is, and referring again to FIG. 1, the current output paths in each architecture comprises, at a minimum, a current source output transistor (or transistors if paralleled for current gain) (M1), a selection transistor to control the flow of the current mirror output transistor(s) (513), the load ®, a current sink mirror transistor or transistors (M2), and a selection transistor to control the flow of the current sink mirror transistor(s) (513'). Each of these elements has some resistance, and hence some amount of the compliance voltage, V+, will be dropped across these elements when current is flowing to stimulate the load, R. Specifically, the compliance voltage V+ will equal V.sub.DS1+V.sub.R+V.sub.DS2, where V.sub.DS1 comprises the drain-to-source voltage drop across output transistor(s) M1 and selection transistor 513, V.sub.DS2 comprises the drain-to-source voltage drop across output transistor(s) M2 and selection transistor 513', and V.sub.R equals the voltage drop across the load.
"Notice that the M1/M3 and M2/M4 current mirrors require that transistors M1 and M2 operate in a saturation mode, such that the channels of the transistors are in 'pinch off.' When in saturation mode, the output current I.sub.out is proportional to the gate voltage of the transistors M1 or M2, but does not depend upon the drain voltage to the first order. However, to keep the transistors M1 and M2 in the saturation mode, a certain drain-to-source voltage, V.sub.DS, has to be satisfied for each transistor. Specifically, V.sub.DS must be greater than the gate-to-source voltage (V.sub.GS) minus the threshold voltage (V.sub.T) of the transistor (i.e., V.sub.DS>V.sub.GS-V.sub.T). This saturation condition is necessarily satisfied because V.sub.DS=V.sub.GS by virtue of the common gate/drain connection of transistors M3 and M4. The minimum drain-to-source voltage V.sub.DS that satisfies this relationship and allows transistors M1 and M2 to operate in the saturation mode is typically on the order of a volt.
"What this means in the context of the output current circuitry of FIG. 1 is that the circuit can operate properly over a range of compliance voltages, V+. For example, suppose a suitable therapy for a patient suggests that a current of I.sub.out=5 mA should be passed between electrodes E.sub.X and E.sub.Y on the IPG. Suppose further that the load R equals 800 ohms. When the current of 5 mA is passed through the load, a voltage V.sub.R=4V will build up across the load (V=I*R). Suppose further for simplicity that the minimum drain-to-source voltage to keep the output transistors M1 and M2 in saturation equals 1V when the effects of the selection transistors 513, 513' are included. (The actual value can be different, but is chosen as 1V for ease of illustration). To provide this current, a minimum compliance voltage, V+ of at least 6V would be needed; if V+
"However, the compliance voltage V+ could be higher than 6V while still producing the proper amount of current. For example, suppose for the same example that the compliance voltage V+ is 8V. In this case, the circuitry is still capable of providing the 5 mA current, and the load (which doesn't change) will still drop 4V at that current. What this means is that the remainder of the compliance voltage must be dropped across the output transistors M1 and M2 as well as their associated selection transistors 513 and 513', e.g., 2V if the source and sink are matched.
"However, running the circuit in this example with an 8V compliance voltage is not efficient. While circuit performance is the same at both 6V and 8V, i.e., both are capable of generating a 5 mA current, the former will draw only 30 mW of power (P=I*V), while the latter will draw 40 mW of power. In other words, 10 mW of power are needlessly dropped across the output transistors M1, M2 and their selection transistors 513 and 513'. This waste of power is regrettable in the context of an implantable medical device such as an IPG. As noted earlier, an IPG typically runs from a battery, and therefore it is important to minimize circuit operation that would otherwise needlessly drain the battery and cause the IPG to cease functioning, or needlessly require the patient to more frequently recharge the battery.
"Unfortunately, it is difficult to design the compliance voltage to an optimal level. Depending on the electrodes stimulated, the magnitude of current required for efficient therapy for a given patient, and the resistance of the patient's flesh, an optimal compliance voltage from the vantage point of power conservation is variable.
"Accordingly, the implantable stimulator art, or more specifically the IPG or SCS system art, would be benefited by techniques for sensing and adjusting the compliance voltage in a manner respectful of the power available to the device. Such solutions are provided herein."
As a supplement to the background information on this patent, NewsRx correspondents also obtained the inventors' summary information for this patent: "Disclosed herein are methods and circuitry for compliance voltage sensing and adjustment in an implantable stimulator device. The present invention measures the voltage across (at least) both the output of the PDACs and NDACs involved in sourcing and sinking the stimulation current. Specifically, the voltages across the output transistors of active PDACs and NDACs involved during stimulation (and, preferably, their selection transistors) are measured during actual stimulation, and possibly during inactive periods as well and as discussed further below. These measured voltages are processed in accordance with an algorithm, where they are compared to a range of permissible guard band voltages for both the PDAC and NDAC outputs (e.g., 1.2 to 1.8V for the NDAC outputs, and 1.5 to 2.1V for the PDAC outputs). These guard band voltage ranges comprise a range in which the output transistors are deemed to be properly in saturation, but not excessively so.
"Should the measured voltages across the output of the PDAC or NDAC be outside of the guard band voltage, the compliance voltage is changed accordingly to a disclosed algorithm to attempt to bring such measured voltages within acceptable limits while still keeping the NDACs and PDACs balanced. In a preferred embodiment, the compliance voltage V+ starts at a maximum value (e.g., 16.8 V), and the PDAC and NDAC output voltages are measured. V+ is adjusted downward until the minimum voltage across an active NDAC (Min(V.sub.NX)) is below a maximum guard band voltage for the output of the NDACs, e.g., 1.8V. In general, V+ is only decreased until this condition is reached, although the compliance voltage can also be increased slightly (if possible) if Min(V.sub.NX) falls below the minimum guard band voltage (e.g., 1.2V).
"Assuming Min(V.sub.NX) is within the NDAC guard band (i.e., between 1.2 and 1.8V), the voltage across the PDACs are similarly measured, and the compliance voltage is potentially further decreased. Thus, if the minimum voltage across an active PDAC (Min(V.sub.PY)) is greater than a maximum guard band voltage for the output transistors of the PDACs, e.g., 2.1V, the compliance voltage is lowered until Min(V.sub.PY) is below 2.1 V. Once Min(V.sub.PY) is within the PDAC guard band (i.e., between 1.5 and 2.1V), the compliance voltage V+ is deemed optimal, as both the output voltage for the PDAC and NDAC are within the guard band voltage, and accordingly are deemed to be in saturation, but not excessively so. However, if Min(V.sub.PY) is below the minimum PDAC guard band value, e.g., 1.5V, V+ can be increased (if possible) and, the compliance voltage V+ is deemed optimal.
"During this algorithm, note that V+ can be decreased if Min(V.sub.PY) is above 2.1V, even when Min(V.sub.NX) is below 1.8V and otherwise is optimal. While this would seem to run the risk of adjusting the NDACs out of alignment, note that Min(V.sub.NX) is tied to (i.e., balanced with) Min(V.sub.PY) by virtue of the current-voltage characteristics of both DACs. Because the currents must match for the NDACs and the PDACs, it is difficult to decrease Min(V.sub.NX) significantly below the minimum NDAC guard band threshold (e.g., 1.2V) without also bringing Min(V.sub.PY) below the minimum PDAC guard band voltage (e.g., 1.5V) and vice versa. Hence, due to this balancing, the compliance voltage can be reduced without significant risk of impacting circuit performance, i.e., such that the circuitry is unable to producing an optimal current.
"In a further preferred embodiment, additional NDAC and PDAC output voltages measurements are made during periods in which actual stimulation is not occurring to further improve the accuracy of the compliance voltage adjustment algorithm. Specifically, as well as measuring the output voltages of both the NDACs and the PDACs while active, i.e., during actual stimulation, the output of each specified NDAC and PDAC is also measured while no current is flowing. Thus, the voltage across each NDAC and PDAC is measured during an interphase period, with all other specified NDACs and PDACs disconnected from the circuit via disabling of their selection transistors. This additional non-active, interphase measurement provides an additional output voltage specific for each NDAC and PDAC, which, while generally 0V, may comprise a small voltage (e.g., 0.2V). When this additional measurement is used in the algorithm, the non-active output voltage measurement for a particular NDAC or PDAC is subtracted from the active output voltage measurement for that NDAC or PDAC to arrive at a difference voltage. This difference voltage, which normally would not vary significantly from the active output voltage measurement, is used by the algorithm, and its assessment of voltages within the guard band, etc., to further improve the algorithm's accuracy.
"While such non-active measurements are not needed in useful all useful embodiments, and while only active measurements can be used, the non-active measurements, as well as improving accuracy, are beneficial in that they are not taken during periods of stimulation. That is to say, such non-active measurements do not result in significant current flow through the patient. As a result, such non-active measurements are not perceptible by the patient. This is beneficial, because measurements compliance-voltage-optimization measurements preferably do not involve output current stimulation that is not related to conditions deemed necessary for patient therapy. Thus, such additional, non-active measurements can improve the accuracy of compliance voltage adjustment without affecting a therapy regimen prescribed by the IPG.
"In short, through the use of the disclosed exemplary algorithm, an optimal compliance voltage taking balancing of the NDACs and PDACs into consideration. The result is sufficient operation of the PDAC and NDAC circuitry, with as low a compliance voltage as possible. As noted above, use of the lowest compliance voltage saves power in the IPG."
For additional information on this patent, see: Shi, Jess W.; He, Yuping; Doan, Que T.; Peterson,
Keywords for this news article include: Algorithms, Biotechnology Companies,
Our reports deliver fact-based news of research and discoveries from around the world. Copyright 2014, NewsRx LLC
Most Popular Stories
- U.S. Families 'Extraordinarily Vulnerable': Yellen
- Larry Ellison Steps Down as Oracle CEO
- Apple Locks Itself Out of Devices
- Alibaba Prices IPO at $68 a Share
- Hillary Clinton to Address CHCI Conference
- Veterans to Get Training as Solar Panel Installers
- Hispanics Doubt Marco Rubio's Chances
- Wildfires Rage in California
- John Cantlie Delivers ISIS Message to Save Life
- Alibaba: Today China, Tomorrow the World