Literature DB >> 20959261

An efficient 3-D eddy-current solver using an independent impedance method for transcranial magnetic stimulation.

Nele De Geeter1, Guillaume Crevecoeur, Luc Dupre.   

Abstract

In many important bioelectromagnetic problem settings, eddy-current simulations are required. Examples are the reduction of eddy-current artifacts in magnetic resonance imaging and techniques, whereby the eddy currents interact with the biological system, like the alteration of the neurophysiology due to transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). TMS has become an important tool for the diagnosis and treatment of neurological diseases and psychiatric disorders. A widely applied method for simulating the eddy currents is the impedance method (IM). However, this method has to contend with an ill conditioned problem and consequently a long convergence time. When dealing with optimal design problems and sensitivity control, the convergence rate becomes even more crucial since the eddy-current solver needs to be evaluated in an iterative loop. Therefore, we introduce an independent IM (IIM), which improves the conditionality and speeds up the numerical convergence. This paper shows how IIM is based on IM and what are the advantages. Moreover, the method is applied to the efficient simulation of TMS. The proposed IIM achieves superior convergence properties with high time efficiency, compared to the traditional IM and is therefore a useful tool for accurate and fast TMS simulations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20959261     DOI: 10.1109/TBME.2010.2087758

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng        ISSN: 0018-9294            Impact factor:   4.538


  4 in total

Review 1.  The development and modelling of devices and paradigms for transcranial magnetic stimulation.

Authors:  Stefan M Goetz; Zhi-De Deng
Journal:  Int Rev Psychiatry       Date:  2017-04-26

2.  Electric field calculation and peripheral nerve stimulation prediction for head and body gradient coils.

Authors:  Peter B Roemer; Trevor Wade; Andrew Alejski; Charles A McKenzie; Brian K Rutt
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2021-06-03       Impact factor: 3.737

3.  How much detail is needed in modeling a transcranial magnetic stimulation figure-8 coil: Measurements and brain simulations.

Authors:  Petar I Petrov; Stefano Mandija; Iris E C Sommer; Cornelis A T van den Berg; Sebastiaan F W Neggers
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-06-22       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Comparison of the induced fields using different coil configurations during deep transcranial magnetic stimulation.

Authors:  Mai Lu; Shoogo Ueno
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-06-06       Impact factor: 3.240

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.