Literature DB >> 26142274

On the importance of electrode parameters for shaping electric field patterns generated by tDCS.

Guilherme B Saturnino1, André Antunes2, Axel Thielscher3.   

Abstract

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) uses electrode pads placed on the head to deliver weak direct current to the brain and modulate neuronal excitability. The effects depend on the intensity and spatial distribution of the electric field. This in turn depends on the geometry and electric properties of the head tissues and electrode pads. Previous numerical studies focused on providing a reasonable level of detail of the head anatomy, often using simplified electrode models. Here, we explore via finite element method (FEM) simulations based on a high-resolution head model how detailed electrode modeling influences the calculated electric field in the brain. We take into account electrode shape, size, connector position and conductivities of different electrode materials (including saline solutions and electrode gels). These factors are systematically characterized to demonstrate their impact on the field distribution in the brain. The goals are to assess the effect of simplified electrode models; and to develop practical rules-of-thumb to achieve a stronger stimulation of the targeted brain regions underneath the electrode pads. We show that for standard rectangular electrode pads, lower saline and gel conductivities result in more homogeneous fields in the region of interest (ROI). Placing the connector at the center of the electrode pad or farthest from the second electrode substantially increases the field strength in the ROI. Our results highlight the importance of detailed electrode modeling and of having an adequate selection of electrode pads/gels in experiments. We also advise for a more detailed reporting of the electrode montages when conducting tDCS experiments, as different configurations significantly affect the results.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Electrode modeling; Field calculations; Finite element method; Spatial targeting; Transcranial direct current stimulation

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26142274     DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.06.067

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


  45 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  Important methodological issues regarding the use of transcranial magnetic stimulation to investigate interoceptive processing: a Comment on Pollatos et al. (2016).

Authors:  Michel-Pierre Coll; Tegan Penton; Hannah Hobson
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2017-05-26       Impact factor: 6.237

3.  Safety parameter considerations of anodal transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in rats.

Authors:  Mark P Jackson; Dennis Truong; Milene L Brownlow; Jessica A Wagner; R Andy McKinley; Marom Bikson; Ryan Jankord
Journal:  Brain Behav Immun       Date:  2017-04-17       Impact factor: 7.217

4.  Acute and repetitive fronto-cerebellar tDCS stimulation improves mood in non-depressed participants.

Authors:  Simon Newstead; Hayley Young; David Benton; Gabriela Jiga-Boy; Maria L Andrade Sienz; R M Clement; Frédéric Boy
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2017-11-02       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Increased Neural Activity in Mesostriatal Regions after Prefrontal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation and l-DOPA Administration.

Authors:  Benjamin Meyer; Caroline Mann; Manuela Götz; Anna Gerlicher; Victor Saase; Kenneth S L Yuen; Felipe Aedo-Jury; Gabriel Gonzalez-Escamilla; Albrecht Stroh; Raffael Kalisch
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2019-05-01       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  Patterns of brain oscillations across different electrode montages in transcranial pulsed current stimulation.

Authors:  Alejandra C Vasquez; Aurore Thibaut; Leon Morales-Quezada; Jorge Leite; Felipe Fregni
Journal:  Neuroreport       Date:  2017-05-24       Impact factor: 1.837

7.  On the importance of precise electrode placement for targeted transcranial electric stimulation.

Authors:  Alexander Opitz; Erin Yeagle; Axel Thielscher; Charles Schroeder; Ashesh D Mehta; Michael P Milham
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2018-07-25       Impact factor: 6.556

8.  Perception of Rhythmic Speech Is Modulated by Focal Bilateral Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation.

Authors:  Benedikt Zoefel; Isobella Allard; Megha Anil; Matthew H Davis
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2019-10-29       Impact factor: 3.225

Review 9.  Mini-review: Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation and the Cerebellum.

Authors:  Maximilian J Wessel; Laurijn R Draaisma; Friedhelm C Hummel
Journal:  Cerebellum       Date:  2022-01-20       Impact factor: 3.847

10.  Prefrontal tDCS attenuates counterfactual thinking in female individuals prone to self-critical rumination.

Authors:  Jens Allaert; Rudi De Raedt; Frederik M van der Veen; Chris Baeken; Marie-Anne Vanderhasselt
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-06-02       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.