Literature DB >> 25100984

Modeling studies for designing transcranial direct current stimulation protocol in Alzheimer's disease.

Shirin Mahdavi1, Fatemeh Yavari1, Shahriar Gharibzadeh1, Farzad Towhidkhah1.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Keywords:  Alzheimer's disease; brain stimulation; computational modeling; finite element model; human head model; transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)

Year:  2014        PMID: 25100984      PMCID: PMC4105634          DOI: 10.3389/fncom.2014.00072

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Front Comput Neurosci        ISSN: 1662-5188            Impact factor:   2.380


× No keyword cloud information.
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been proposed as a technique for brain activity modulation. In this technique, a weak current (usually 1–2 mA) is delivered to scalp through two sponge electrodes. There are two types of tDCS stimulation: cathodal and anodal, which inhibit and facilitate neuronal activity, respectively (Hansen, 2012). tDCS has been shown to be effective in Alzheimer's disease (AD). Several studies have revealed that tDCS application can improve memory performance in Alzheimer's patients (APs) (Ferrucci et al., 2008; Boggio et al., 2009, 2012). For example, results of a single session tDCS study (Ferrucci et al., 2008) revealed that anodal/cathodal tDCS significantly enhanced/worsened word recognition in AD patients. In another study, application of anodal stimulation over DLPFC of APs has led to recognition memory improvement in a visual memory task (Boggio et al., 2009). These effects seem to be persistent, as in a multi-session tDCS study (Boggio et al., 2012), improvement in patients' visual recognition lasted for 4 weeks. Current pathway through brain plays a key role in the observed effects. Currently, modeling studies provide the only way for determining the pattern of current flow during tDCS. In recent years, finite element modeling has been suggested as a reliable and helpful tool in clinical therapeutic applications (Bikson et al., 2012). A critical issue which is required to be considered in modeling studies is the inter-individual anatomical variations. A modeling study has shown the profound role of individual cortical morphology in determination of current flow distribution for healthy people (Datta et al., 2012). Also the impact of pathologic anatomy (skull defects and lesions) on modulation of current flow has been examined in some previous studies (Datta et al., 2010, 2011). Specifically, in AD loss of neuronal structures and synaptic damages result in cortex shrinkage and ventricular enlargement (Frisoni et al., 2010). This changes the volume of CSF- referred as “super highway” for current flow- and therefore can significantly alters current pathway in these patients' head compared to healthy subjects (Bikson et al., 2012). These studies suggest that it is not precise to determine the dosage of applied current only based on healthy human modeling or clinical trial outcomes. We hypothesize that change in cortical thickness due to brain atrophy has significant effects on current flow pattern. These anatomical alterations may shift the stimulated areas and peak current density location in head. They may even alter the expected results from tDCS application. We suggest that cortical thickness is required to be considered in modeling studies to obtain more precise pattern of current flow in head and the stimulated brain regions. Specifically, AD affects differently on each patient's brain structure. We suggest developing individualized models based on each patient's MRI data. These models can be used by clinicians to find the optimal electrode montage and current amplitude for each patient. Using Individual-based models for designing clinical protocols could provide us with better interpretation of the results.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
  9 in total

1.  Transcranial direct current stimulation in patients with skull defects and skull plates: high-resolution computational FEM study of factors altering cortical current flow.

Authors:  Abhishek Datta; Marom Bikson; Felipe Fregni
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2010-05-07       Impact factor: 6.556

Review 2.  The clinical use of structural MRI in Alzheimer disease.

Authors:  Giovanni B Frisoni; Nick C Fox; Clifford R Jack; Philip Scheltens; Paul M Thompson
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurol       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 42.937

3.  Prolonged visual memory enhancement after direct current stimulation in Alzheimer's disease.

Authors:  Paulo Sergio Boggio; Roberta Ferrucci; Francesca Mameli; Débora Martins; Oscar Martins; Maurizio Vergari; Laura Tadini; Elio Scarpini; Felipe Fregni; Alberto Priori
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2011-07-27       Impact factor: 8.955

4.  Individualized model predicts brain current flow during transcranial direct-current stimulation treatment in responsive stroke patient.

Authors:  Abhishek Datta; Julie M Baker; Marom Bikson; Julius Fridriksson
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2010-12-05       Impact factor: 8.955

5.  Transcranial direct current stimulation improves recognition memory in Alzheimer disease.

Authors:  R Ferrucci; F Mameli; I Guidi; S Mrakic-Sposta; M Vergari; S Marceglia; F Cogiamanian; S Barbieri; E Scarpini; A Priori
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2008-06-04       Impact factor: 9.910

6.  Temporal cortex direct current stimulation enhances performance on a visual recognition memory task in Alzheimer disease.

Authors:  P S Boggio; L P Khoury; D C S Martins; O E M S Martins; E C de Macedo; F Fregni
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  2008-10-31       Impact factor: 10.154

Review 7.  High-resolution modeling assisted design of customized and individualized transcranial direct current stimulation protocols.

Authors:  Marom Bikson; Asif Rahman; Abhishek Datta; Felipe Fregni; Lotfi Merabet
Journal:  Neuromodulation       Date:  2012-07-10

8.  Action mechanisms of transcranial direct current stimulation in Alzheimer's disease and memory loss.

Authors:  Niels Hansen
Journal:  Front Psychiatry       Date:  2012-05-15       Impact factor: 4.157

9.  Inter-Individual Variation during Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation and Normalization of Dose Using MRI-Derived Computational Models.

Authors:  Abhishek Datta; Dennis Truong; Preet Minhas; Lucas C Parra; Marom Bikson
Journal:  Front Psychiatry       Date:  2012-10-22       Impact factor: 4.157

  9 in total
  2 in total

Review 1.  Inter-Individual Variability in tDCS Effects: A Narrative Review on the Contribution of Stable, Variable, and Contextual Factors.

Authors:  Alessandra Vergallito; Sarah Feroldi; Alberto Pisoni; Leonor J Romero Lauro
Journal:  Brain Sci       Date:  2022-04-20

Review 2.  Value and Efficacy of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in the Cognitive Rehabilitation: A Critical Review Since 2000.

Authors:  Davide Cappon; Marjan Jahanshahi; Patrizia Bisiacchi
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2016-04-18       Impact factor: 4.677

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.