Comparison of consistency between image guided and craniometric transcranial magnetic stimulation coil placement

Young, Isabella M.; Osipowicz, Karol; Mackenzie, Alana; Clarke, Oliver; Taylor, Hugh M; Nicholas, Peter J.; Ryan, Mark; Holle, Jonas; Tanglay, Onur; Doyen, Stéphane; Sughrue, Michael E.

doi:10.1016/j.brs.2022.10.008

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…That is, on average, the Beam F3 method produces higher E-field in L-DLPFC, but in our sample, showed more variability across individuals. A recently published report showed that in adults, when comparing coil distance from BA46, the Beam F3 method produced the largest variance from the target compared to the 5-cm rule, and the MRI-guided approach [47]. There have been proposed modifications to the Beam F3 method.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of coil placement approaches targeting dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in depressed adolescents receiving repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation: an electric field modeling study

Deng¹,

Robins²,

Dannhauer³

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: A promising treatment option for adolescents with treatment-resistant depression is high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) delivered to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (L-DLPFC). Conventional coil placement strategies for rTMS in adults include the 5-cm rule, the Beam F3 method, and the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) neuronavigation method. The purpose of this study was to compare the three targeting approaches to a computational E-field optimization coil placement method in depressed adolescents. Methods: Ten consenting and assenting depressed adolescents (4 females, age: 15.9 +/- 1.1) participated in an open-label rTMS treatment study. Participants were offered MRI-guided rTMS 5 times per week over 6 to 8 weeks. To compute the induced E-field, a head model was generated based on MRI images, and a figure-8 TMS coil (Neuronetics) was placed over the L-DLPFC using the four targeting approaches. Results: Results show that there was a significant difference in the induced E-field at the L-DLPFC between the four targeting methods (chi-squared = 24.7, p < 0.001). Post hoc pairwise comparisons show that there was a significant difference between any two of the targeting methods (Holm adjusted p < 0.05), with the 5-cm rule producing the weakest E-field (46.0 +/- 17.4 V/m), followed by the F3 method (87.4 +/- 35.4 V/m), followed by the MRI-guided (112.1 +/-14.6 V/m), and followed by the computationally optimized method (130.1 +/- 18.1 V/m). The Bartlett test of homogeneity of variances show that there was a significant difference in sample variance between the groups (K^2 = 8.0, p < 0.05), with F3 having the largest variance. In participants who completed the full course of treatment, the median E-field strength in the L-DLPFC was correlated with the change in depression severity (r = -0.77, p < 0.05). Conclusions: The E-field models revealed inadequacies of scalp-based targeting methods compared to MRI-guidance. Computational optimization may further enhance E-field dose delivery to the treatment target.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of coil placement approaches targeting dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in depressed adolescents receiving repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation: an electric field modeling study

Deng¹,

Robins²,

Dannhauer³

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…That is, on average, the Beam F3 method produces higher E-fields in L-DLPFC, but in our sample, it showed more variability across individuals. A recently published report showed that in adults, when comparing coil distance from BA46, the Beam F3 method produced the largest variance from the target compared to the 5

rule and the MRI-guided approach [ 54 ]. There have been proposed modifications to the Beam F3 method.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimizing TMS Coil Placement Approaches for Targeting the Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex in Depressed Adolescents: An Electric Field Modeling Study

Deng,

Robins,

Dannhauer

et al. 2023

Biomedicines

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

High-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (L-DLPFC) shows promise as a treatment for treatment-resistant depression in adolescents. Conventional rTMS coil placement strategies include the 5 cm, the Beam F3, and the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) neuronavigation methods. The purpose of this study was to use electric field (E-field) models to compare the three targeting approaches to a computational E-field optimization coil placement method in depressed adolescents. Ten depressed adolescents (4 females, age: 15.9±1.1) participated in an open-label rTMS treatment study and were offered MRI-guided rTMS five times per week over 6–8 weeks. Head models were generated based on individual MRI images, and E-fields were simulated for the four targeting approaches. Results showed a significant difference in the induced E-fields at the L-DLPFC between the four targeting methods (χ2=24.7, p<0.001). Post hoc pairwise comparisons showed that there was a significant difference between any two of the targeting methods (Holm adjusted p<0.05), with the 5 cm rule producing the weakest E-field (46.0±17.4V/m), followed by the F3 method (87.4±35.4V/m), followed by MRI-guided (112.1±14.6V/m), and followed by the computational approach (130.1±18.1V/m). Variance analysis showed that there was a significant difference in sample variance between the groups (K2=8.0, p<0.05), with F3 having the largest variance. Participants who completed the full course of treatment had median E-fields correlated with depression symptom improvement (r=−0.77, p<0.05). E-field models revealed limitations of scalp-based methods compared to MRI guidance, suggesting computational optimization could enhance dose delivery to the target.

show abstract

Comparison of consistency between image guided and craniometric transcranial magnetic stimulation coil placement

Cited by 2 publications

References 9 publications

Comparison of coil placement approaches targeting dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in depressed adolescents receiving repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation: an electric field modeling study

Comparison of coil placement approaches targeting dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in depressed adolescents receiving repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation: an electric field modeling study

Optimizing TMS Coil Placement Approaches for Targeting the Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex in Depressed Adolescents: An Electric Field Modeling Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About