We used computer simulations to investigate finite element models of the layered structure of the human skull in EEG source analysis. Local models, where each skull location was modeled differently, and global models, where the skull was assumed to be homogeneous, were compared to a reference model, in which spongy and compact bone were explicitly accounted for. In both cases, isotropic and anisotropic conductivity assumptions were taken into account. We considered sources in the entire brain and determined errors both in the forward calculation and the reconstructed dipole position. Our results show that accounting for the local variations over the skull surface is important, whereas assuming isotropic or anisotropic skull conductivity has little influence. Moreover, we showed that, if using an isotropic and homogeneous skull model, the ratio between skin/brain and skull conductivities should be considerably lower than the commonly used 80:1. For skull modeling, we recommend (1) Local models: if compact and spongy bone can be identified with sufficient accuracy (e.g., from MRI) and their conductivities can be assumed to be known (e.g., from measurements), one should model these explicitly by assigning each voxel to one of the two conductivities, (2) Global models: if the conditions of (1) are not met, one should model the skull as either homogeneous and isotropic, but with considerably higher skull conductivity than the usual 0.0042 S/m, or as homogeneous and anisotropic, but with higher radial skull conductivity than the usual 0.0042 S/m and a considerably lower radial:tangential conductivity anisotropy than the usual 1:10.

The major goal of the evaluation in presurgical epilepsy diagnosis for medically intractable patients is the precise reconstruction of the epileptogenic foci, preferably with non-invasive methods. This paper evaluates whether surface electroencephalography (EEG) source analysis based on a 1mm anisotropic finite element (FE) head model can provide additional guidance for presurgical epilepsy diagnosis and whether it is practically feasible in daily routine. A 1mm hexahedra FE volume conductor model of the patient's head with special focus on accurately modeling the compartments skull, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and the anisotropic conducting brain tissues was constructed using non-linearly co-registered T1-, T2-and diffusion-tensor-magnetic resonance imaging data. The electrodes of intra-cranial EEG (iEEG) measurements were extracted from a co-registered computed tomography image. Goal function scan (GFS), minimum norm least squares (MNLS), standardized low resolution electromagnetic tomography (sLORETA) and spatio-temporal current dipole modeling inverse methods were then applied to the peak of the averaged ictal discharges EEG data. MNLS and sLORETA pointed to a single center of activity. Moving and rotating single dipole fits resulted in an explained variance of more than 97%. The non-invasive EEG source analysis methods localized at the border of the lesion and at the border of the iEEG electrodes which mainly received ictal discharges. Source orientation was towards the epileptogenic tissue. For the reconstructed superficial source, brain conductivity anisotropy and the lesion conductivity had only a minor influence, whereas a correct modeling of the highly conducting CSF compartment and the anisotropic skull was found to be important. The proposed FE forward modeling approach strongly simplifies meshing and reduces run-time (37 Milliseconds for one forward computation in the model with 3.1 Million unknowns), corroborating the practical feasibility of the approach.

No abstract

The use of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in patients with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) has been suggested as a promising alternative to psychopharmacological treatment approaches due to its local and network effects on brain activation. In the current study, we investigated the impact of tDCS over the right inferior frontal gyrus (rIFG) on interference control in 21 male adolescents with ADHD and 21 age matched healthy controls aged 13–17 years, who underwent three separate sessions of tDCS (anodal, cathodal, and sham) while completing a Flanker task. Even though anodal stimulation appeared to diminish commission errors in the ADHD group, the overall analysis revealed no significant effect of tDCS. Since participants showed a considerable learning effect from the first to the second session, performance in the first session was separately analyzed. ADHD patients receiving sham stimulation in the first session showed impaired interference control compared to healthy control participants whereas ADHD patients who were exposed to anodal stimulation, showed comparable performance levels (commission errors, reaction time variability) to the control group. These results suggest that anodal tDCS of the right inferior frontal gyrus could improve interference control in patients with ADHD.