Literature DB >> 27705955

Changing head model extent affects finite element predictions of transcranial direct current stimulation distributions.

Aprinda Indahlastari1, Munish Chauhan, Benjamin Schwartz, Rosalind J Sadleir.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we determined efficient head model sizes relative to predicted current densities in transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). APPROACH: Efficiency measures were defined based on a finite element (FE) simulations performed using nine human head models derived from a single MRI data set, having extents varying from 60%-100% of the original axial range. Eleven tissue types, including anisotropic white matter, and three electrode montages (T7-T8, F3-right supraorbital, Cz-Oz) were used in the models. MAIN
RESULTS: Reducing head volume extent from 100% to 60%, that is, varying the model's axial range from between the apex and C3 vertebra to one encompassing only apex to the superior cerebellum, was found to decrease the total modeling time by up to half. Differences between current density predictions in each model were quantified by using a relative difference measure (RDM). Our simulation results showed that [Formula: see text] was the least affected (a maximum of 10% error) for head volumes modeled from the apex to the base of the skull (60%-75% volume). SIGNIFICANCE: This finding suggested that the bone could act as a bioelectricity boundary and thus performing FE simulations of tDCS on the human head with models extending beyond the inferior skull may not be necessary in most cases to obtain reasonable precision in current density results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27705955      PMCID: PMC5361410          DOI: 10.1088/1741-2560/13/6/066006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neural Eng        ISSN: 1741-2552            Impact factor:   5.379


  29 in total

1.  Modeling skull electrical properties.

Authors:  R J Sadleir; A Argibay
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2007-07-14       Impact factor: 3.934

2.  Investigation of tDCS volume conduction effects in a highly realistic head model.

Authors:  S Wagner; S M Rampersad; Ü Aydin; J Vorwerk; T F Oostendorp; T Neuling; C S Herrmann; D F Stegeman; C H Wolters
Journal:  J Neural Eng       Date:  2013-12-05       Impact factor: 5.379

3.  A computational modelling study of transcranial direct current stimulation montages used in depression.

Authors:  Siwei Bai; Socrates Dokos; Kerrie-Anne Ho; Colleen Loo
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2013-11-15       Impact factor: 6.556

4.  Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in a realistic head model.

Authors:  Rosalind J Sadleir; Tracy D Vannorsdall; David J Schretlen; Barry Gordon
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2010-03-27       Impact factor: 6.556

5.  Guidelines for precise and accurate computational models of tDCS.

Authors:  Marom Bikson; Abhishek Datta
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2011-07-03       Impact factor: 8.955

6.  Influence of anisotropic conductivity in the skull and white matter on transcranial direct current stimulation via an anatomically realistic finite element head model.

Authors:  Hyun Sang Suh; Won Hee Lee; Tae-Seong Kim
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2012-10-09       Impact factor: 3.609

7.  The geometric structure of the brain fiber pathways.

Authors:  Van J Wedeen; Douglas L Rosene; Ruopeng Wang; Guangping Dai; Farzad Mortazavi; Patric Hagmann; Jon H Kaas; Wen-Yih I Tseng
Journal:  Science       Date:  2012-03-30       Impact factor: 47.728

8.  Transcranial direct current stimulation: a computer-based human model study.

Authors:  Tim Wagner; Felipe Fregni; Shirley Fecteau; Alan Grodzinsky; Markus Zahn; Alvaro Pascual-Leone
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2007-02-04       Impact factor: 6.556

9.  A comparison between block and smooth modeling in finite element simulations of tDCS.

Authors:  Aprinda Indahlastari; Rosalind J Sadleir
Journal:  Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc       Date:  2015

10.  tDCS over the left inferior frontal cortex improves speech production in aphasia.

Authors:  Paola Marangolo; Valentina Fiori; Maria A Calpagnano; Serena Campana; Carmelina Razzano; Carlo Caltagirone; Andrea Marini
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2013-09-06       Impact factor: 3.169

View more
  8 in total

1.  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

2.  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

3.  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

4.  i-SATA: A MATLAB based toolbox to estimate current density generated by transcranial direct current stimulation in an individual brain.

Authors:  Rajan Kashyap; Sagarika Bhattacharjee; Ramaswamy Arumugam; Kenichi Oishi; John E Desmond; Sh Annabel Chen
Journal:  J Neural Eng       Date:  2020-10-14       Impact factor: 5.379

Review 5.  Non-invasive Brain Stimulation: Probing Intracortical Circuits and Improving Cognition in the Aging Brain.

Authors:  Joyce Gomes-Osman; Aprinda Indahlastari; Peter J Fried; Danylo L F Cabral; Jordyn Rice; Nicole R Nissim; Serkan Aksu; Molly E McLaren; Adam J Woods
Journal:  Front Aging Neurosci       Date:  2018-06-08       Impact factor: 5.750

6.  Methods to Compare Predicted and Observed Phosphene Experience in tACS Subjects.

Authors:  Aprinda Indahlastari; Aditya K Kasinadhuni; Christopher Saar; Kevin Castellano; Bakir Mousa; Munish Chauhan; Thomas H Mareci; Rosalind J Sadleir
Journal:  Neural Plast       Date:  2018-12-06       Impact factor: 3.599

7.  A flexible workflow for simulating transcranial electric stimulation in healthy and lesioned brains.

Authors:  Benjamin Kalloch; Pierre-Louis Bazin; Arno Villringer; Bernhard Sehm; Mario Hlawitschka
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-05-14       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Standard Non-Personalized Electric Field Modeling of Twenty Typical tDCS Electrode Configurations via the Computational Finite Element Method: Contributions and Limitations of Two Different Approaches.

Authors:  Andrés Molero-Chamizo; Michael A Nitsche; Carolina Gutiérrez Lérida; Ángeles Salas Sánchez; Raquel Martín Riquel; Rafael Tomás Andújar Barroso; José Ramón Alameda Bailén; Jesús Carlos García Palomeque; Guadalupe Nathzidy Rivera-Urbina
Journal:  Biology (Basel)       Date:  2021-11-25
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.