Literature DB >> 24099977

Automated MRI segmentation for individualized modeling of current flow in the human head.

Yu Huang1, Jacek P Dmochowski, Yuzhuo Su, Abhishek Datta, Christopher Rorden, Lucas C Parra.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: High-definition transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS) and high-density electroencephalography require accurate models of current flow for precise targeting and current source reconstruction. At a minimum, such modeling must capture the idiosyncratic anatomy of the brain, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and skull for each individual subject. Currently, the process to build such high-resolution individualized models from structural magnetic resonance images requires labor-intensive manual segmentation, even when utilizing available automated segmentation tools. Also, accurate placement of many high-density electrodes on an individual scalp is a tedious procedure. The goal was to develop fully automated techniques to reduce the manual effort in such a modeling process. APPROACH: A fully automated segmentation technique based on Statical Parametric Mapping 8, including an improved tissue probability map and an automated correction routine for segmentation errors, was developed, along with an automated electrode placement tool for high-density arrays. The performance of these automated routines was evaluated against results from manual segmentation on four healthy subjects and seven stroke patients. The criteria include segmentation accuracy, the difference of current flow distributions in resulting HD-tDCS models and the optimized current flow intensities on cortical targets. MAIN
RESULTS: The segmentation tool can segment out not just the brain but also provide accurate results for CSF, skull and other soft tissues with a field of view extending to the neck. Compared to manual results, automated segmentation deviates by only 7% and 18% for normal and stroke subjects, respectively. The predicted electric fields in the brain deviate by 12% and 29% respectively, which is well within the variability observed for various modeling choices. Finally, optimized current flow intensities on cortical targets do not differ significantly. SIGNIFICANCE: Fully automated individualized modeling may now be feasible for large-sample EEG research studies and tDCS clinical trials.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24099977      PMCID: PMC3848963          DOI: 10.1088/1741-2560/10/6/066004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neural Eng        ISSN: 1741-2552            Impact factor:   5.379


  38 in total

1.  Modeling of the human skull in EEG source analysis.

Authors:  Moritz Dannhauer; Benjamin Lanfer; Carsten H Wolters; Thomas R Knösche
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2010-08-05       Impact factor: 5.038

Review 2.  Advances in functional and structural MR image analysis and implementation as FSL.

Authors:  Stephen M Smith; Mark Jenkinson; Mark W Woolrich; Christian F Beckmann; Timothy E J Behrens; Heidi Johansen-Berg; Peter R Bannister; Marilena De Luca; Ivana Drobnjak; David E Flitney; Rami K Niazy; James Saunders; John Vickers; Yongyue Zhang; Nicola De Stefano; J Michael Brady; Paul M Matthews
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 6.556

3.  Transcranial DC stimulation in fibromyalgia: optimized cortical target supported by high-resolution computational models.

Authors:  Mariana E Mendonca; Marcus B Santana; Abrahão F Baptista; Abhishek Datta; Marom Bikson; Felipe Fregni; Cintia P Araujo
Journal:  J Pain       Date:  2011-04-15       Impact factor: 5.820

4.  Influences of skull segmentation inaccuracies on EEG source analysis.

Authors:  B Lanfer; M Scherg; M Dannhauer; T R Knösche; M Burger; C H Wolters
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2012-05-11       Impact factor: 6.556

5.  Cortical surface-based analysis. II: Inflation, flattening, and a surface-based coordinate system.

Authors:  B Fischl; M I Sereno; A M Dale
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 6.556

6.  Influence of anisotropic conductivity in the skull and white matter on transcranial direct current stimulation via an anatomically realistic finite element head model.

Authors:  Hyun Sang Suh; Won Hee Lee; Tae-Seong Kim
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2012-10-09       Impact factor: 3.609

7.  Transcranial direct current stimulation: a computer-based human model study.

Authors:  Tim Wagner; Felipe Fregni; Shirley Fecteau; Alan Grodzinsky; Markus Zahn; Alvaro Pascual-Leone
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2007-02-04       Impact factor: 6.556

8.  Realistic and spherical head modeling for EEG forward problem solution: a comparative cortex-based analysis.

Authors:  Federica Vatta; Fabio Meneghini; Fabrizio Esposito; Stefano Mininel; Francesco Di Salle
Journal:  Comput Intell Neurosci       Date:  2010-02-14

9.  The point spread function of the human head and its implications for transcranial current stimulation.

Authors:  Jacek P Dmochowski; Marom Bikson; Lucas C Parra
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2012-09-21       Impact factor: 3.609

10.  Transcranial direct current stimulation in pediatric brain: a computational modeling study.

Authors:  Preet Minhas; Marom Bikson; Adam J Woods; Alyssa R Rosen; Sudha K Kessler
Journal:  Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc       Date:  2012
View more
  40 in total

1.  Projected current density comparison in tDCS block and smooth FE modeling.

Authors:  Aprinda Indahlastari; Munish Chauhan; Rosalind J Sadleir
Journal:  Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc       Date:  2016-08

2.  Changing head model extent affects finite element predictions of transcranial direct current stimulation distributions.

Authors:  Aprinda Indahlastari; Munish Chauhan; Benjamin Schwartz; Rosalind J Sadleir
Journal:  J Neural Eng       Date:  2016-10-05       Impact factor: 5.379

3.  Inherent physiological artifacts in EEG during tDCS.

Authors:  Nigel Gebodh; Zeinab Esmaeilpour; Devin Adair; Kenneth Chelette; Jacek Dmochowski; Adam J Woods; Emily S Kappenman; Lucas C Parra; Marom Bikson
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2018-10-12       Impact factor: 6.556

4.  Benchmarking transcranial electrical stimulation finite element models: a comparison study.

Authors:  Aprinda Indahlastari; Munish Chauhan; Rosalind J Sadleir
Journal:  J Neural Eng       Date:  2019-01-03       Impact factor: 5.379

5.  Magnetic-resonance-based measurement of electromagnetic fields and conductivity in vivo using single current administration-A machine learning approach.

Authors:  Saurav Z K Sajib; Munish Chauhan; Oh In Kwon; Rosalind J Sadleir
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-07-22       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Modeling transcranial electrical stimulation in the aging brain.

Authors:  Aprinda Indahlastari; Alejandro Albizu; Andrew O'Shea; Megan A Forbes; Nicole R Nissim; Jessica N Kraft; Nicole D Evangelista; Hanna K Hausman; Adam J Woods
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2020-02-06       Impact factor: 8.955

7.  Electric Field Model of Transcranial Electric Stimulation in Nonhuman Primates: Correspondence to Individual Motor Threshold.

Authors:  Won Hee Lee; Sarah H Lisanby; Andrew F Laine; Angel V Peterchev
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2015-04-22       Impact factor: 4.538

8.  A comparison between block and smooth modeling in finite element simulations of tDCS.

Authors:  Aprinda Indahlastari; Rosalind J Sadleir
Journal:  Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc       Date:  2015

9.  High-Definition and Non-invasive Brain Modulation of Pain and Motor Dysfunction in Chronic TMD.

Authors:  Adam Donnell; Thiago D Nascimento; Mara Lawrence; Vikas Gupta; Tina Zieba; Dennis Q Truong; Marom Bikson; Abhi Datta; Emily Bellile; Alexandre F DaSilva
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2015-06-23       Impact factor: 8.955

10.  Impact of brain atrophy on tDCS and HD-tDCS current flow: a modeling study in three variants of primary progressive aphasia.

Authors:  Gozde Unal; Bronte Ficek; Kimberly Webster; Syed Shahabuddin; Dennis Truong; Benjamin Hampstead; Marom Bikson; Kyrana Tsapkini
Journal:  Neurol Sci       Date:  2020-02-10       Impact factor: 3.307

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.