Pedro Cavaleiro Miranda1, Paula Faria, Mark Hallett. 1. Institute of Biophysics and Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Science, University of Lisbon, 1749-016 Lisbon, Portugal. pcmiranda@fc.ul.pt
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between the ratio of injected current to electrode area (I/A) and the current density at a fixed target point in the brain under the electrode during transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). METHODS: Numerical methods were used to calculate the current density distribution in a standard spherical head model as well as in a homogeneous cylindrical conductor. RESULTS: The calculations using the cylindrical model showed that, for the same I/A ratio, the current density at a fixed depth under the electrode was lower for the smaller of the two electrodes. Using the spherical model, the current density at a fixed target point in the brain under the electrode was found to be a non-linear function of the I/A ratio. For smaller electrodes, more current than predicted by the I/A ratio was required to achieve a predetermined current density in the brain. CONCLUSIONS: A non-linear relationship exists between the injected current, the electrode area and the current density at a fixed target point in the brain, which can be described in terms of a montage-specific I-A curve. SIGNIFICANCE: I-A curves calculated using realistic head models or obtained experimentally should be used when adjusting the current for different electrode sizes or when comparing the effect of different current-electrode area combinations.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between the ratio of injected current to electrode area (I/A) and the current density at a fixed target point in the brain under the electrode during transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). METHODS: Numerical methods were used to calculate the current density distribution in a standard spherical head model as well as in a homogeneous cylindrical conductor. RESULTS: The calculations using the cylindrical model showed that, for the same I/A ratio, the current density at a fixed depth under the electrode was lower for the smaller of the two electrodes. Using the spherical model, the current density at a fixed target point in the brain under the electrode was found to be a non-linear function of the I/A ratio. For smaller electrodes, more current than predicted by the I/A ratio was required to achieve a predetermined current density in the brain. CONCLUSIONS: A non-linear relationship exists between the injected current, the electrode area and the current density at a fixed target point in the brain, which can be described in terms of a montage-specific I-A curve. SIGNIFICANCE: I-A curves calculated using realistic head models or obtained experimentally should be used when adjusting the current for different electrode sizes or when comparing the effect of different current-electrode area combinations.
Authors: Sónia I Gonçalves; Jan C de Munck; Jeroen P A Verbunt; Fetsje Bijma; Rob M Heethaar; Fernando Lopes da Silva Journal: IEEE Trans Biomed Eng Date: 2003-06 Impact factor: 4.538
Authors: Michael A Nitsche; Antje Seeber; Kai Frommann; Cornelia Carmen Klein; Christian Rochford; Maren S Nitsche; Kristina Fricke; David Liebetanz; Nicolas Lang; Andrea Antal; Walter Paulus; Frithjof Tergau Journal: J Physiol Date: 2005-07-07 Impact factor: 5.182
Authors: M A Nitsche; S Doemkes; T Karaköse; A Antal; D Liebetanz; N Lang; F Tergau; W Paulus Journal: J Neurophysiol Date: 2007-01-24 Impact factor: 2.714
Authors: M A Nitsche; K Fricke; U Henschke; A Schlitterlau; D Liebetanz; N Lang; S Henning; F Tergau; W Paulus Journal: J Physiol Date: 2003-08-29 Impact factor: 5.182
Authors: Angel V Peterchev; Timothy A Wagner; Pedro C Miranda; Michael A Nitsche; Walter Paulus; Sarah H Lisanby; Alvaro Pascual-Leone; Marom Bikson Journal: Brain Stimul Date: 2011-11-01 Impact factor: 8.955
Authors: A Antal; I Alekseichuk; M Bikson; J Brockmöller; A R Brunoni; R Chen; L G Cohen; G Dowthwaite; J Ellrich; A Flöel; F Fregni; M S George; R Hamilton; J Haueisen; C S Herrmann; F C Hummel; J P Lefaucheur; D Liebetanz; C K Loo; C D McCaig; C Miniussi; P C Miranda; V Moliadze; M A Nitsche; R Nowak; F Padberg; A Pascual-Leone; W Poppendieck; A Priori; S Rossi; P M Rossini; J Rothwell; M A Rueger; G Ruffini; K Schellhorn; H R Siebner; Y Ugawa; A Wexler; U Ziemann; M Hallett; W Paulus Journal: Clin Neurophysiol Date: 2017-06-19 Impact factor: 3.708
Authors: A J Woods; A Antal; M Bikson; P S Boggio; A R Brunoni; P Celnik; L G Cohen; F Fregni; C S Herrmann; E S Kappenman; H Knotkova; D Liebetanz; C Miniussi; P C Miranda; W Paulus; A Priori; D Reato; C Stagg; N Wenderoth; M A Nitsche Journal: Clin Neurophysiol Date: 2015-11-22 Impact factor: 3.708