Use of electric field orientation as an index for estimating the contribution of model complexity in transcranial direct current stimulation forward head model development

Shahid, Syed Salman; Song, Bo; Salman, Humaira; Oliveira, Marília Menezes de; Wen, Peng

doi:10.1049/iet-smt.2014.0220

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 90 publications

(119 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Main factors that determine inter-individual variability of tDCS effects include anatomical differences of the head and brain between subjects [ 23 ]. Indeed, the resistance of the skull, skin, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), and meninges determines electrical conductance, and thus the amount of current applied to the skin entering the brain [ 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 ]. Besides, the international 10/20 EEG system is a common procedure used for tDCS electrode placement, and notable anatomical differences may compromise cortical correspondence with this standard system.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Standard Non-Personalized Electric Field Modeling of Twenty Typical tDCS Electrode Configurations via the Computational Finite Element Method: Contributions and Limitations of Two Different Approaches

Molero‐Chamizo

Nitsche

Lérida

et al. 2021

Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation procedure to modulate cortical excitability and related brain functions. tDCS can effectively alter multiple brain functions in healthy humans and is suggested as a therapeutic tool in several neurological and psychiatric diseases. However, variability of results is an important limitation of this method. This variability may be due to multiple factors, including age, head and brain anatomy (including skull, skin, CSF and meninges), cognitive reserve and baseline performance level, specific task demands, as well as comorbidities in clinical settings. Different electrode montages are a further source of variability between tDCS studies. A procedure to estimate the electric field generated by specific tDCS electrode configurations, which can be helpful to adapt stimulation protocols, is the computational finite element method. This approach is useful to provide a priori modeling of the current spread and electric field intensity that will be generated according to the implemented electrode montage. Here, we present standard, non-personalized model-based electric field simulations for motor, dorsolateral prefrontal, and posterior parietal cortex stimulation according to twenty typical tDCS electrode configurations using two different current flow modeling software packages. The resulting simulated maximum intensity of the electric field, focality, and current spread were similar, but not identical, between models. The advantages and limitations of both mathematical simulations of the electric field are presented and discussed systematically, including aspects that, at present, prevent more widespread application of respective simulation approaches in the field of non-invasive brain stimulation.

show abstract