Biophysically Realistic Neuron Models for Simulation of Cortical Stimulation

Aberra, Aman S.; Peterchev, Angel V.; Grill, Warren M.

doi:10.1101/328534

Cited by 33 publications

(100 citation statements)

References 114 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Decades of research has shown that neural membranes do respond to high-frequency fields, albeit the dynamics become complex and lead to phenomena, such as conduction block (i.e., inhibition of action potential propagation) (Bhadra et al, 2007(Bhadra et al, , 2019Crosby et al, 2017;Joseph and Butera, 2009;Joseph et al, 2007;Kilgore and Bhadra, 2006;Tai et al, 2005;Zhang et al, 2006aZhang et al, , 2006b. This research has also shown that axons are more susceptible to polarization from (invasive and non-invasive) electric stimulation (Aberra et al, 2018;Chakraborty et al, 2018;Hause, 1975;Howell and McIntyre, 2020;McIntyre et al, 2004;Rahman et al, 2013;Ranck, 1975;Wongsarnpigoon and Grill, 2012). Specifically, ac-tion potentials can be initiated at the axon terminals, in correspondence to maxima of the electric field (Chakraborty et al, 2018;Hause, 1975;Hentall, 1985).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biophysics of Temporal Interference Stimulation

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biophysics of Temporal Interference Stimulation

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Neuronal models examining membrane properties for different parts of the neuron showed that because dendrites lack myelin (Aberra et al 2018) and have a small diameter (Pashut et al 2011), they respond preferentially to wider pulses (Rattay et al 2012). That was also shown in an animal model experiment were short TMS pulses (~80µs) failed to produce any activation in L5 dendrites (Murphy et al 2016).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 76%

Increasing pulse energy of 5Hz rTMS improves its efficacy in inducing excitatory aftereffects

Halawa

Reichert

Anil

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction:High frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation induces excitation when applied to the motor cortex, as measured by increased amplitudes of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) after the intervention. Different pulse widths induce different effects, likely by primarily stimulating distinct segments of neurons due to the different membrane properties of different neuronal segments.Here we focus on the aftereffects generated with high frequencies of controllable pulse TMS (cTMS).Objectives: To investigate the influence of different stimulation intensities, pulse widths and direction of high frequency rTMS on its excitatory plastic aftereffects as reflected by MEP amplitudes. Methods:Using a controllable pulse stimulator TMS (cTMS), we stimulated the hand motor cortex of 20 healthy subjects with 5 Hz rTMS with 1200 bidirectional pulses with the main component widths of 80 and 120 microseconds. 80% resting motor threshold (RMT) intensity was investigated for both directions anterior-posterior (AP) and vice versa (PA), and at 90% RMT in the AP direction for the second experiment.Results: 80% HF rTMS did not produce any significant excitation in both AP and PA directions. 90% RMT AP stimulation exhibited a significant excitation aftereffect with the 120 microseconds wide pulses, whereas the 80 microseconds failed to produce significant excitation. Conclusions:Higher intensity and longer HF pulse rTMS are more efficient in producing excitatory aftereffects, this may be due to the different membrane properties of the various neuronal segments such as dendrites whose activation plays a major role in long term potentiation.Significance: The findings here may contribute to better results in future clinical studies performed with longer cTMS pulses. Figure 1: Diagram of the experiment timeline for each session of the experiment. Methods: ParticipantsFor the first experiment, we recruited fourteen subjects, four males and ten females, mean age was 23.5 ± 2.6 SD years. For the second experiment, a different set of fifteen healthy volunteers was recruited, four males and eleven females, the mean age was 24.1 ± 3.1 SD years. All participants were right-handed and free from any neurological or psychiatric disorders, took no centrally acting medications, and had no contraindications to TMS. Because the power cap of the device and the standard coil for the wider pulse shapes prevented intensities above 50% of maximal stimulator output (MSO), a higher resting motor threshold, i.e. above 70% MSO for a Magstim 200 2 device, was an exclusion criterion.We obtained written informed consent from each subject before participation.The local ethics committee of the University Medical Center Göttingen approved the study protocol, which conformed to the Declaration of Helsinki. RecordingsMotor evoked potentials (MEPs) were recorded from the first dorsal interosseous (FDI) muscle of the right hand with surface Ag-AgCl electrodes in a belly-tendon montage. The electromyography signals were amplified, band-pass filtered (2 Hz-2...

show abstract

“…Finally, it is to be noted that the electrical properties of each compartment depend on the neuron segments, so the model can be extended to include morphologically detailed neurons for the central nervous system (CNS) (Aberra, Peterchev and Grill, 2018). The model can consist of bifurcations and branches, pre-and post-synaptic terminals, and dendritic arborisation.…”

Section: A Modified Cable Equation Describes the Neuronal Membrane Pomentioning

confidence: 99%

Review on biophysical modelling and simulation studies for transcranial magnetic stimulation

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a technique for noninvasively stimulating a brain area for therapeutic, rehabilitation treatments and neuroscience research. Despite our understanding of the physical principles and experimental developments pertaining to TMS, it is difficult to identify the exact brain target as the generated dosage exhibits a non-uniform distribution owing to the complicated and subject-dependent brain anatomy and the lack of biomarkers that can quantify the effects of TMS in most cortical areas. Computational dosimetry has progressed significantly and enables TMS assessment by computation of the induced electric field (the primary physical agent known to activate the brain neurons) in a digital representation of the human head. In this review, TMS dosimetry studies are summarised, clarifying the importance of the anatomical and human biophysical parameters and computational methods. This review shows that there is a high consensus on the importance of a detailed cortical folding representation and an accurate modelling of the surrounding cerebrospinal fluid. Recent studies have also enabled the prediction of individually optimised stimulation based on magnetic resonance imaging of the patient/subject and have attempted to understand the temporal effects of TMS at the cellular level by incorporating neural modelling. These efforts, together with the fast deployment of personalised TMS computations, will permit the adoption of TMS dosimetry as a standard procedure in clinical procedures.

show abstract

Biophysically Realistic Neuron Models for Simulation of Cortical Stimulation

Cited by 33 publications

References 114 publications

Biophysics of Temporal Interference Stimulation

Biophysics of Temporal Interference Stimulation

Increasing pulse energy of 5Hz rTMS improves its efficacy in inducing excitatory aftereffects

Review on biophysical modelling and simulation studies for transcranial magnetic stimulation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About