Literature DB >> 26026283

Inter-subject Variability in Electric Fields of Motor Cortical tDCS.

Ilkka Laakso1, Satoshi Tanaka2, Soichiro Koyama3, Valerio De Santis4, Akimasa Hirata4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The sources of inter-subject variability in the efficacy of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) remain unknown. One potential source of variations is the brain's electric field, which varies according to each individual's anatomical features.
OBJECTIVE: We employed an approach that combines imaging and computational modeling to quantitatively study the extent and primary causes of inter-subject variation in tDCS electric fields.
METHODS: Anatomically-accurate models of the head and brain of 24 males (age: 38.63 ± 11.24 years) were constructed from structural MRI. Finite-element method was used to computationally estimate the electric fields for tDCS of the motor cortex. Surface-based inter-subject registration of the electric field and functional MRI data was used for group level statistical analysis.
RESULTS: We observed large differences in each individual's electric field patterns. However, group level analysis revealed that the average electric fields concentrated in the vicinity of the primary motor cortex. The variations in the electric fields in the hand motor area could be characterized by a normal distribution with a standard deviation of approximately 20% of the mean. The cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) thickness was the primary factor influencing an individual's electric field, thereby explaining 50% of the inter-individual variability, a thicker layer of CSF decreasing the electric field strength.
CONCLUSIONS: The variability in the electric fields is related to each individual's anatomical features and can only be controlled using detailed image processing. Age was found to have a slight negative effect on the electric field, which might have implications on tDCS studies on aging brains.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Electric field; Finite-element method; Inter-subject variability; Motor cortex; tDCS

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26026283     DOI: 10.1016/j.brs.2015.05.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brain Stimul        ISSN: 1876-4754            Impact factor:   8.955


  75 in total

1.  Impact of extremely low-frequency magnetic fields on human postural control.

Authors:  Sebastien Villard; Alicia Allen; Nicolas Bouisset; Michael Corbacio; Alex Thomas; Michel Guerraz; Alexandre Legros
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2018-12-05       Impact factor: 1.972

Review 2.  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

3.  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

4.  Neuromodulation of Axon Terminals.

Authors:  Darpan Chakraborty; Dennis Q Truong; Marom Bikson; Hanoch Kaphzan
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2018-08-01       Impact factor: 5.357

5.  Cortical excitability controls the strength of mental imagery.

Authors:  Rebecca Keogh; Johanna Bergmann; Joel Pearson
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2020-05-05       Impact factor: 8.140

Review 6.  Age-related changes in motor cortex plasticity assessed with non-invasive brain stimulation: an update and new perspectives.

Authors:  John G Semmler; Brodie J Hand; Ryoki Sasaki; Ashley Merkin; George M Opie
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2021-07-16       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Poststimulation time interval-dependent effects of motor cortex anodal tDCS on reaction-time task performance.

Authors:  Andrés Molero-Chamizo; José R Alameda Bailén; Tamara Garrido Béjar; Macarena García López; Inmaculada Jaén Rodríguez; Carolina Gutiérrez Lérida; Silvia Pérez Panal; Gloria González Ángel; Laura Lemus Corchero; María J Ruiz Vega; Michael A Nitsche; Guadalupe N Rivera-Urbina
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 3.282

8.  Methods to monitor accurate and consistent electrode placements in conventional transcranial electrical stimulation.

Authors:  Aprinda Indahlastari; Alejandro Albizu; Nicole R Nissim; Kelsey R Traeger; Andrew O'Shea; Adam J Woods
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2018-10-28       Impact factor: 8.955

9.  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

10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.