Literature DB >> 25613437

Determinants of the electric field during transcranial direct current stimulation.

Alexander Opitz1, Walter Paulus2, Susanne Will3, Andre Antunes4, Axel Thielscher5.   

Abstract

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) causes a complex spatial distribution of the electric current flow in the head which hampers the accurate localization of the stimulated brain areas. In this study we show how various anatomical features systematically shape the electric field distribution in the brain during tDCS. We constructed anatomically realistic finite element (FEM) models of two individual heads including conductivity anisotropy and different skull layers. We simulated a widely employed electrode montage to induce motor cortex plasticity and moved the stimulating electrode over the motor cortex in small steps to examine the resulting changes of the electric field distribution in the underlying cortex. We examined the effect of skull thickness and composition on the passing currents showing that thinner skull regions lead to higher electric field strengths. This effect is counteracted by a larger proportion of higher conducting spongy bone in thicker regions leading to a more homogenous current over the skull. Using a multiple regression model we could identify key factors that determine the field distribution to a significant extent, namely the thicknesses of the cerebrospinal fluid and the skull, the gyral depth and the distance to the anode and cathode. These factors account for up to 50% of the spatial variation of the electric field strength. Further, we demonstrate that individual anatomical factors can lead to stimulation "hotspots" which are partly resistant to electrode positioning. Our results give valuable novel insights in the biophysical foundation of tDCS and highlight the importance to account for individual anatomical factors when choosing an electrode montage.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25613437     DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.01.033

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuroimage        ISSN: 1053-8119            Impact factor:   6.556


  149 in total

1.  Individual differences in TMS sensitivity influence the efficacy of tDCS in facilitating sensorimotor adaptation.

Authors:  L Labruna; A Stark-Inbar; A Breska; M Dabit; B Vanderschelden; M A Nitsche; R B Ivry
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2019-03-13       Impact factor: 8.955

2.  Safety and Feasibility of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation as an Exploratory Assessment of Corticospinal Connectivity in Infants After Perinatal Brain Injury: An Observational Study.

Authors:  Samuel T Nemanich; Chao-Ying Chen; Mo Chen; Elizabeth Zorn; Bryon Mueller; Colleen Peyton; Jed T Elison; James Stinear; Raghu Rao; Michael Georgieff; Jeremiah Menk; Kyle Rudser; Bernadette Gillick
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2019-06-01

3.  Differential Age Effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Associative Memory.

Authors:  Ryan C Leach; Matthew P McCurdy; Michael C Trumbo; Laura E Matzen; Eric D Leshikar
Journal:  J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci       Date:  2019-09-15       Impact factor: 4.077

4.  Preliminary Evidence That Excitatory Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Extends Time to Task Failure of a Sustained, Submaximal Muscular Contraction in Older Adults.

Authors:  Kentaro Oki; Niladri K Mahato; Masato Nakazawa; Shinichi Amano; Christopher R France; David W Russ; Brian C Clark
Journal:  J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci       Date:  2016-02-24       Impact factor: 6.053

Review 5.  Low intensity transcranial electric stimulation: Safety, ethical, legal regulatory and application guidelines.

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

6.  Comparative modeling of transcranial magnetic and electric stimulation in mouse, monkey, and human.

Authors:  Ivan Alekseichuk; Kathleen Mantell; Sina Shirinpour; Alexander Opitz
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2019-03-22       Impact factor: 6.556

7.  Systematic evaluation of the impact of stimulation intensity on neuroplastic after-effects induced by transcranial direct current stimulation.

Authors:  Asif Jamil; Giorgi Batsikadze; Hsiao-I Kuo; Ludovica Labruna; Alkomiet Hasan; Walter Paulus; Michael A Nitsche
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2016-11-08       Impact factor: 5.182

8.  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

9.  Efficacy of Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation is Related to Sensitivity to Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation.

Authors:  Ludovica Labruna; Asif Jamil; Shane Fresnoza; Giorgi Batsikadze; Min-Fang Kuo; Benjamin Vanderschelden; Richard B Ivry; Michael A Nitsche
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2015-09-01       Impact factor: 8.955

Review 10.  A technical guide to tDCS, and related non-invasive brain stimulation tools.

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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.