Cargando…
Individual differences in transcranial electrical stimulation current density
Transcranial electrical stimulation (TCES) is effective in treating many conditions, but it has not been possible to accurately forecast current density within the complex anatomy of a given subject's head. We sought to predict and verify TCES current densities and determine the variability of...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Editorial Department of Journal of Biomedical Research
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3841475/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24285948 http://dx.doi.org/10.7555/JBR.27.20130074 |
_version_ | 1782292780449529856 |
---|---|
author | Russell, Michael J Goodman, Theodore Pierson, Ronald Shepherd, Shane Wang, Qiang Groshong, Bennett Wiley, David F |
author_facet | Russell, Michael J Goodman, Theodore Pierson, Ronald Shepherd, Shane Wang, Qiang Groshong, Bennett Wiley, David F |
author_sort | Russell, Michael J |
collection | PubMed |
description | Transcranial electrical stimulation (TCES) is effective in treating many conditions, but it has not been possible to accurately forecast current density within the complex anatomy of a given subject's head. We sought to predict and verify TCES current densities and determine the variability of these current distributions in patient-specific models based on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data. Two experiments were performed. The first experiment estimated conductivity from MRIs and compared the current density results against actual measurements from the scalp surface of 3 subjects. In the second experiment, virtual electrodes were placed on the scalps of 18 subjects to model simulated current densities with 2 mA of virtually applied stimulation. This procedure was repeated for 4 electrode locations. Current densities were then calculated for 75 brain regions. Comparison of modeled and measured external current in experiment 1 yielded a correlation of r = .93. In experiment 2, modeled individual differences were greatest near the electrodes (ten-fold differences were common), but simulated current was found in all regions of the brain. Sites that were distant from the electrodes (e.g. hypothalamus) typically showed two-fold individual differences. MRI-based modeling can effectively predict current densities in individual brains. Significant variation occurs between subjects with the same applied electrode configuration. Individualized MRI-based modeling should be considered in place of the 10-20 system when accurate TCES is needed. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3841475 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | Editorial Department of Journal of Biomedical Research |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-38414752013-11-27 Individual differences in transcranial electrical stimulation current density Russell, Michael J Goodman, Theodore Pierson, Ronald Shepherd, Shane Wang, Qiang Groshong, Bennett Wiley, David F J Biomed Res Research Paper Transcranial electrical stimulation (TCES) is effective in treating many conditions, but it has not been possible to accurately forecast current density within the complex anatomy of a given subject's head. We sought to predict and verify TCES current densities and determine the variability of these current distributions in patient-specific models based on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data. Two experiments were performed. The first experiment estimated conductivity from MRIs and compared the current density results against actual measurements from the scalp surface of 3 subjects. In the second experiment, virtual electrodes were placed on the scalps of 18 subjects to model simulated current densities with 2 mA of virtually applied stimulation. This procedure was repeated for 4 electrode locations. Current densities were then calculated for 75 brain regions. Comparison of modeled and measured external current in experiment 1 yielded a correlation of r = .93. In experiment 2, modeled individual differences were greatest near the electrodes (ten-fold differences were common), but simulated current was found in all regions of the brain. Sites that were distant from the electrodes (e.g. hypothalamus) typically showed two-fold individual differences. MRI-based modeling can effectively predict current densities in individual brains. Significant variation occurs between subjects with the same applied electrode configuration. Individualized MRI-based modeling should be considered in place of the 10-20 system when accurate TCES is needed. Editorial Department of Journal of Biomedical Research 2013-11 2013-10-25 /pmc/articles/PMC3841475/ /pubmed/24285948 http://dx.doi.org/10.7555/JBR.27.20130074 Text en © 2013 by the Journal of Biomedical Research. All rights reserved. |
spellingShingle | Research Paper Russell, Michael J Goodman, Theodore Pierson, Ronald Shepherd, Shane Wang, Qiang Groshong, Bennett Wiley, David F Individual differences in transcranial electrical stimulation current density |
title | Individual differences in transcranial electrical stimulation current density |
title_full | Individual differences in transcranial electrical stimulation current density |
title_fullStr | Individual differences in transcranial electrical stimulation current density |
title_full_unstemmed | Individual differences in transcranial electrical stimulation current density |
title_short | Individual differences in transcranial electrical stimulation current density |
title_sort | individual differences in transcranial electrical stimulation current density |
topic | Research Paper |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3841475/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24285948 http://dx.doi.org/10.7555/JBR.27.20130074 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT russellmichaelj individualdifferencesintranscranialelectricalstimulationcurrentdensity AT goodmantheodore individualdifferencesintranscranialelectricalstimulationcurrentdensity AT piersonronald individualdifferencesintranscranialelectricalstimulationcurrentdensity AT shepherdshane individualdifferencesintranscranialelectricalstimulationcurrentdensity AT wangqiang individualdifferencesintranscranialelectricalstimulationcurrentdensity AT groshongbennett individualdifferencesintranscranialelectricalstimulationcurrentdensity AT wileydavidf individualdifferencesintranscranialelectricalstimulationcurrentdensity |