Marta Parazzini1, Elena Rossi2, Roberta Ferrucci3, Ilaria Liorni2, Alberto Priori3, Paolo Ravazzani4. 1. CNR Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Istituto di Elettronica e di Ingegneria dell'Informazione e delle Telecomunicazioni IEIIT, Milano, Italy. Electronic address: marta.parazzini@ieiit.cnr.it. 2. CNR Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Istituto di Elettronica e di Ingegneria dell'Informazione e delle Telecomunicazioni IEIIT, Milano, Italy; Dipartimento di Elettronica, Informazione e Bioingegneria, Politecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy. 3. Dipartimento di Fisiopatologia Medico-Chirurgica e dei Trapianti, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milano, Italy; Centro Clinico per la Neurostimolazione, le Neurotecnologie ed i Disordini del Movimento, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milano, Italy. 4. CNR Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Istituto di Elettronica e di Ingegneria dell'Informazione e delle Telecomunicazioni IEIIT, Milano, Italy.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) over the cerebellum (or cerebellar tDCS) modulates working memory, changes cerebello-brain interaction, and affects locomotion in humans. Also, the use of tDCS has been proposed for the treatment of disorders characterized by cerebellar dysfunction. Nonetheless, the electric field (E) and current density (J) spatial distributions generated by cerebellar tDCS are unknown. This work aimed to estimate E and J distributions during cerebellar tDCS. METHODS: Computational electromagnetics techniques were applied in three human realistic models of different ages and gender. RESULTS: The stronger E and J occurred mainly in the cerebellar cortex, with some spread (up to 4%) toward the occipital cortex. Also, changes by ±1cm in the position of the active electrode resulted in a small effect (up to 4%) in the E and J spatial distribution in the cerebellum. Finally, the E and J spreads to the brainstem and the heart were negligible, thus further supporting the safety of this technique. CONCLUSIONS: Despite inter-individual differences, our modeling study confirms that the cerebellum is the structure mainly involved by cerebellar tDCS. SIGNIFICANCE: Modeling approach reveals that during cerebellar tDCS the current spread to other structures outside the cerebellum is unlike to produce functional effects.
OBJECTIVE: Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) over the cerebellum (or cerebellar tDCS) modulates working memory, changes cerebello-brain interaction, and affects locomotion in humans. Also, the use of tDCS has been proposed for the treatment of disorders characterized by cerebellar dysfunction. Nonetheless, the electric field (E) and current density (J) spatial distributions generated by cerebellar tDCS are unknown. This work aimed to estimate E and J distributions during cerebellar tDCS. METHODS: Computational electromagnetics techniques were applied in three human realistic models of different ages and gender. RESULTS: The stronger E and J occurred mainly in the cerebellar cortex, with some spread (up to 4%) toward the occipital cortex. Also, changes by ±1cm in the position of the active electrode resulted in a small effect (up to 4%) in the E and J spatial distribution in the cerebellum. Finally, the E and J spreads to the brainstem and the heart were negligible, thus further supporting the safety of this technique. CONCLUSIONS: Despite inter-individual differences, our modeling study confirms that the cerebellum is the structure mainly involved by cerebellar tDCS. SIGNIFICANCE: Modeling approach reveals that during cerebellar tDCS the current spread to other structures outside the cerebellum is unlike to produce functional effects.
Authors: Frank Van Overwalle; Mario Manto; Zaira Cattaneo; Silvia Clausi; Chiara Ferrari; John D E Gabrieli; Xavier Guell; Elien Heleven; Michela Lupo; Qianying Ma; Marco Michelutti; Giusy Olivito; Min Pu; Laura C Rice; Jeremy D Schmahmann; Libera Siciliano; Arseny A Sokolov; Catherine J Stoodley; Kim van Dun; Larry Vandervert; Maria Leggio Journal: Cerebellum Date: 2020-12 Impact factor: 3.847
Authors: Renee E Shimizu; Allan D Wu; Jasmine K Samra; Barbara J Knowlton Journal: Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci Date: 2017-01-05 Impact factor: 6.237
Authors: Peter E Turkeltaub; Mary K Swears; Anila M D'Mello; Catherine J Stoodley Journal: Restor Neurol Neurosci Date: 2016-05-24 Impact factor: 2.406
Authors: Arun Singh; Nicholas T Trapp; Benjamin De Corte; Scarlett Cao; Johnathon Kingyon; Aaron D Boes; Krystal L Parker Journal: Cerebellum Date: 2019-06 Impact factor: 3.847
Authors: Thomas Hulst; Liane John; Michael Küper; Jos N van der Geest; Sophia L Göricke; Opher Donchin; Dagmar Timmann Journal: J Neurophysiol Date: 2017-05-03 Impact factor: 2.714
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
Authors: Z Cattaneo; C Ferrari; A Ciricugno; E Heleven; D J L G Schutter; M Manto; F Van Overwalle Journal: Cerebellum Date: 2021-07-16 Impact factor: 3.847