Geometrical Variation’s Influence on the Effects of Stimulation May be Important in the Conventional and Multi-Array tDCS–Comparison of Electrical Fields Computed

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is an emerging non-invasive neuromodulation method that is convenient and popular for clinical use. However, there is a practical issue when tDCS is applied to actual subjects, in which the geometrical variation in each model influences the effect of the predicted electric field (EF) distribution tDCS induces, and thus, may evoke unexpected EF distributions. In this paper, we investigated the effect of geometrical variations in the conventional two-pad tDCS and multi-array tDCS. For comparison, we constructed five spherical models of various thicknesses with cerebrospinal fluid and skull, as well as three anatomical head models. Thereafter, tDCS’ stimulation effects in the primary motor cortex (Brodmann area 4) were compared with respect to the EFs induced. We observed that geometrical variation’s effect is obvious for both forms of tDCS; but regardless of inter-subject variability, the multi-array tDCS montage may yield induced EFs of comparable or higher intensity and far greater focality. Thus, the multi-array tDCS is expected to have great potential to overcome inter-subject variability.

[1]  Alexander Opitz,et al.  Determinants of the electric field during transcranial direct current stimulation , 2015, NeuroImage.

[2]  Bruce Fischl,et al.  FreeSurfer , 2012, NeuroImage.

[3]  M. Rosenfeld,et al.  Correlation between skull thickness asymmetry and scalp potential estimated by a numerical model of the head , 1995, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[4]  C. Koch,et al.  The origin of extracellular fields and currents — EEG, ECoG, LFP and spikes , 2012, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[5]  Satoshi Tanaka,et al.  Inter-subject Variability in Electric Fields of Motor Cortical tDCS , 2015, Brain Stimulation.

[6]  Julie M. Baker,et al.  Individualized model predicts brain current flow during transcranial direct-current stimulation treatment in responsive stroke patient , 2011, Brain Stimulation.

[7]  Abhishek Datta,et al.  Physiological and modeling evidence for focal transcranial electrical brain stimulation in humans: A basis for high-definition tDCS , 2013, NeuroImage.

[8]  M. Bikson,et al.  Transcranial current stimulation focality using disc and ring electrode configurations: FEM analysis , 2008, Journal of neural engineering.

[9]  B. Cheeran,et al.  Inter-individual Variability in Response to Non-invasive Brain Stimulation Paradigms , 2014, Brain Stimulation.

[10]  Deniz Erdogmus,et al.  Optimization of focality and direction in dense electrode array transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) , 2016, Journal of neural engineering.

[11]  S. Jun,et al.  Multi-Scale Computational Models for Electrical Brain Stimulation , 2017, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[12]  Felix M Mottaghy,et al.  Noninvasive brain stimulation with transcranial magnetic or direct current stimulation (TMS/tDCS)-From insights into human memory to therapy of its dysfunction. , 2008, Methods.

[13]  Sergio P. Rigonatti,et al.  Go-no-go task performance improvement after anodal transcranial DC stimulation of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in major depression. , 2007, Journal of affective disorders.

[14]  Axel Thielscher,et al.  Field modeling for transcranial magnetic stimulation: A useful tool to understand the physiological effects of TMS? , 2015, 2015 37th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC).

[15]  Ursula van Rienen,et al.  Impact of uncertain head tissue conductivity in the optimization of transcranial direct current stimulation for an auditory target , 2015, Journal of neural engineering.

[16]  F. Fregni,et al.  Prolonged visual memory enhancement after direct current stimulation in Alzheimer's disease , 2012, Brain Stimulation.

[17]  Miad Faezipour,et al.  Computational Stimulation of the Basal Ganglia Neurons with Cost Effective Delayed Gaussian Waveforms , 2017, Front. Comput. Neurosci..

[18]  Á. Pascual-Leone,et al.  A Controlled Clinical Trial of Cathodal DC Polarization in Patients with Refractory Epilepsy , 2006, Epilepsia.

[19]  M. Hallett,et al.  A finite element analysis of the effect of electrode area and inter-electrode distance on the spatial distribution of the current density in tDCS , 2011, Journal of neural engineering.

[20]  L. Parra,et al.  Optimized multi-electrode stimulation increases focality and intensity at target , 2011, Journal of neural engineering.

[21]  J. Triesch,et al.  A multi-scale computational model of the effects of TMS on motor cortex. , 2017, F1000Research.

[22]  L. Cohen,et al.  Effects of non-invasive cortical stimulation on skilled motor function in chronic stroke. , 2005, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[23]  N. Wenderoth,et al.  A technical guide to tDCS, and related non-invasive brain stimulation tools , 2016, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[24]  D. Reato,et al.  Gyri-precise head model of transcranial direct current stimulation: Improved spatial focality using a ring electrode versus conventional rectangular pad , 2009, Brain Stimulation.

[25]  Su Golder,et al.  Safety of transcranial direct current stimulation: Evidence based update 2016 , 2017, Brain Stimulation.

[26]  Abhishek Datta,et al.  Establishing safety limits for transcranial direct current stimulation , 2009, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[27]  Sung Chan Jun,et al.  Computational Study on Subdural Cortical Stimulation - The Influence of the Head Geometry, Anisotropic Conductivity, and Electrode Configuration , 2014, PloS one.

[28]  M. Nitsche,et al.  Comparing Cortical Plasticity Induced by Conventional and High-Definition 4 × 1 Ring tDCS: A Neurophysiological Study , 2013, Brain Stimulation.

[29]  F. X. Bostick,et al.  Potential and current density distributions of cranial electrotherapy stimulation (CES) in a four-concentric-spheres model , 1996, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[30]  Mark W. Woolrich,et al.  Advances in functional and structural MR image analysis and implementation as FSL , 2004, NeuroImage.

[31]  L. Parra,et al.  Inter-Individual Variation during Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation and Normalization of Dose Using MRI-Derived Computational Models , 2012, Front. Psychiatry.

[32]  Marco Attene,et al.  A lightweight approach to repairing digitized polygon meshes , 2010, The Visual Computer.

[33]  A. Priori,et al.  Non‐synaptic mechanisms underlie the after‐effects of cathodal transcutaneous direct current stimulation of the human brain , 2005, The Journal of physiology.

[34]  Steen Moeller,et al.  The Human Connectome Project: A data acquisition perspective , 2012, NeuroImage.

[35]  Dick F Stegeman,et al.  The coil orientation dependency of the electric field induced by TMS for M1 and other brain areas , 2015, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[36]  Miad Faezipour,et al.  Desynchronization and Energy Efficiency of Gaussian Neurostimulation on Different Sites of the Basal Ganglia , 2017, 2017 IEEE 17th International Conference on Bioinformatics and Bioengineering (BIBE).

[37]  M. Bikson,et al.  Regulatory considerations for the clinical and research use of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS): Review and recommendations from an expert panel , 2015, Clinical research and regulatory affairs.

[38]  M. Nitsche,et al.  Partially non‐linear stimulation intensity‐dependent effects of direct current stimulation on motor cortex excitability in humans , 2013, The Journal of physiology.

[39]  C. Lüscher,et al.  [Non-invasive brain stimulation for Parkinson's disease]. , 2015, Revue medicale suisse.

[40]  Abhishek Datta,et al.  High‐Resolution Modeling Assisted Design of Customized and Individualized Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Protocols , 2012, Neuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society.

[41]  L. Parra,et al.  Cellular effects of acute direct current stimulation: somatic and synaptic terminal effects , 2013, The Journal of physiology.

[42]  S. Jun,et al.  Relation between the electric field and activation of cortical neurons in transcranial electrical stimulation , 2019, Brain Stimulation.

[43]  S. Jun,et al.  The Effect of a Transcranial Channel as a Skull/Brain Interface in High-Definition Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation—A Computational Study , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[44]  Stephen P. Boyd,et al.  Disciplined Convex Programming , 2006 .

[45]  Julie M. Baker.  Using transcranial direct current stimulation to treat aphasia , 2009 .

[46]  Giulio Ruffini,et al.  Optimization of multifocal transcranial current stimulation for weighted cortical pattern targeting from realistic modeling of electric fields , 2014, NeuroImage.