Literature DB >> 35377345

TAP: targeting and analysis pipeline for optimization and verification of coil placement in transcranial magnetic stimulation.

Moritz Dannhauer1, Ziping Huang1,2, Lysianne Beynel1, Eleanor Wood1, Noreen Bukhari-Parlakturk3, Angel V Peterchev1,4,5,2.   

Abstract

Objective.Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) can modulate brain function via an electric field (E-field) induced in a brain region of interest (ROI). The ROI E-field can be computationally maximized and set to match a specific reference using individualized head models to find the optimal coil placement and stimulus intensity. However, the available software lacks many practical features for prospective planning of TMS interventions and retrospective evaluation of the experimental targeting accuracy.Approach.The TMS targeting and analysis pipeline (TAP) software uses an MRI/fMRI-derived brain target to optimize coil placement considering experimental parameters such as the subject's hair thickness and coil placement restrictions. The coil placement optimization is implemented in SimNIBS 3.2, for which an additional graphical user interface (TargetingNavigator) is provided to visualize/adjust procedural parameters. The coil optimization process also computes the E-field at the target, allowing the selection of the TMS device intensity setting to achieve specific E-field strengths. The optimized coil placement information is prepared for neuronavigation software, which supports targeting during the TMS procedure. The neuronavigation system can record the coil placement during the experiment, and these data can be processed in TAP to quantify the accuracy of the experimental TMS coil placement and induced E-field.Main results.TAP was demonstrated in a study consisting of three repetitive TMS sessions in five subjects. TMS was delivered by an experienced operator under neuronavigation with the computationally optimized coil placement. Analysis of the experimental accuracy from the recorded neuronavigation data indicated coil location and orientation deviations up to about 2 mm and 2°, respectively, resulting in an 8% median decrease in the target E-field magnitude compared to the optimal placement.Significance.TAP supports navigated TMS with a variety of features for rigorous and reproducible stimulation delivery, including planning and evaluation of coil placement and intensity selection for E-field-based dosing.
© 2022 IOP Publishing Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  MRI; TMS; coil; electric field; model; neuronavigation; targeting

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35377345      PMCID: PMC9131512          DOI: 10.1088/1741-2552/ac63a4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neural Eng        ISSN: 1741-2552            Impact factor:   5.043


  36 in total

1.  Transcranial magnetic stimulation. Which part of the current waveform causes the stimulation?

Authors:  E Corthout; A T Barker; A Cowey
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 1.972

Review 2.  Optimal focal transcranial magnetic activation of the human motor cortex: effects of coil orientation, shape of the induced current pulse, and stimulus intensity.

Authors:  J P Brasil-Neto; L G Cohen; M Panizza; J Nilsson; B J Roth; M Hallett
Journal:  J Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  1992-01       Impact factor: 2.177

3.  Simulation of transcranial magnetic stimulation in head model with morphologically-realistic cortical neurons.

Authors:  Aman S Aberra; Boshuo Wang; Warren M Grill; Angel V Peterchev
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2019-10-07       Impact factor: 8.955

4.  Closed-loop transcranial magnetic stimulation of real-time EEG based on the AR mode method.

Authors:  Zhaohuan Ding; Gaoxiang Ouyang; He Chen; Xiaoli Li
Journal:  Biomed Phys Eng Express       Date:  2020-03-13

5.  Localizing the Primary Motor Cortex of the Hand by the 10-5 and 10-20 Systems for Neurostimulation: An MRI Study.

Authors:  Leandro Moura Silva; Karl Marx S Silva; Wigínio Gabriel Lira-Bandeira; Adriana Clementino Costa-Ribeiro; Severino Aires Araújo-Neto
Journal:  Clin EEG Neurosci       Date:  2020-07-01       Impact factor: 1.843

6.  Inter-individual variability in optimal current direction for transcranial magnetic stimulation of the motor cortex.

Authors:  Daniela Balslev; Wouter Braet; Craig McAllister; R Chris Miall
Journal:  J Neurosci Methods       Date:  2007-02-04       Impact factor: 2.390

7.  A generalized workflow for conducting electric field-optimized, fMRI-guided, transcranial magnetic stimulation.

Authors:  Nicholas L Balderston; Camille Roberts; Emily M Beydler; Zhi-De Deng; Thomas Radman; Bruce Luber; Sarah H Lisanby; Monique Ernst; Christian Grillon
Journal:  Nat Protoc       Date:  2020-09-30       Impact factor: 13.491

8.  Electric field measurement of two commercial active/sham coils for transcranial magnetic stimulation.

Authors:  J Evan Smith; Angel V Peterchev
Journal:  J Neural Eng       Date:  2018-06-22       Impact factor: 5.379

Review 9.  FSL.

Authors:  Mark Jenkinson; Christian F Beckmann; Timothy E J Behrens; Mark W Woolrich; Stephen M Smith
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2011-09-16       Impact factor: 6.556

10.  A reexamination of motor and prefrontal TMS in tobacco use disorder: Time for personalized dosing based on electric field modeling?

Authors:  Kevin A Caulfield; Xingbao Li; Mark S George
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2021-07-10       Impact factor: 4.861

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.