Cargando…

Pediatric stroke and transcranial direct current stimulation: methods for rational individualized dose optimization

Background: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been investigated mainly in adults and doses may not be appropriate in pediatric applications. In perinatal stroke where potential applications are promising, rational adaptation of dosage for children remains under investigation. Object...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gillick, Bernadette T., Kirton, Adam, Carmel, Jason B., Minhas, Preet, Bikson, Marom
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4168687/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25285077
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00739
_version_ 1782335598343749632
author Gillick, Bernadette T.
Kirton, Adam
Carmel, Jason B.
Minhas, Preet
Bikson, Marom
author_facet Gillick, Bernadette T.
Kirton, Adam
Carmel, Jason B.
Minhas, Preet
Bikson, Marom
author_sort Gillick, Bernadette T.
collection PubMed
description Background: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been investigated mainly in adults and doses may not be appropriate in pediatric applications. In perinatal stroke where potential applications are promising, rational adaptation of dosage for children remains under investigation. Objective: Construct child-specific tDCS dosing parameters through case study within a perinatal stroke tDCS safety and feasibility trial. Methods: 10-year-old subject with a diagnosis of presumed perinatal ischemic stroke and hemiparesis was identified. T1 magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans used to derive computerized model for current flow and electrode positions. Workflow using modeling results and consideration of dosage in previous clinical trials was incorporated. Prior ad hoc adult montages vs. de novo optimized montages provided distinct risk benefit analysis. Approximating adult dose required consideration of changes in both peak brain current flow and distribution which further tradeoff between maximizing efficacy and adding safety factors. Electrode size, position, current intensity, compliance voltage, and duration were controlled independently in this process. Results: Brain electric fields modeled and compared to values previously predicted models (Datta et al., 2011; Minhas et al., 2012). Approximating conservative brain current flow patterns and intensities used in previous adult trials for comparable indications, the optimal current intensity established was 0.7 mA for 10 min with a tDCS C3/C4 montage. Specifically 0.7 mA produced comparable peak brain current intensity of an average adult receiving 1.0 mA. Electrode size of 5 × 7 cm(2) with 1.0 mA and low-voltage tDCS was employed to maximize tolerability. Safety and feasibility confirmed with subject tolerating the session well and no serious adverse events. Conclusion: Rational approaches to dose customization, with steps informed by computational modeling, may improve guidance for pediatric stroke tDCS trials.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4168687
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41686872014-10-03 Pediatric stroke and transcranial direct current stimulation: methods for rational individualized dose optimization Gillick, Bernadette T. Kirton, Adam Carmel, Jason B. Minhas, Preet Bikson, Marom Front Hum Neurosci Neuroscience Background: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been investigated mainly in adults and doses may not be appropriate in pediatric applications. In perinatal stroke where potential applications are promising, rational adaptation of dosage for children remains under investigation. Objective: Construct child-specific tDCS dosing parameters through case study within a perinatal stroke tDCS safety and feasibility trial. Methods: 10-year-old subject with a diagnosis of presumed perinatal ischemic stroke and hemiparesis was identified. T1 magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans used to derive computerized model for current flow and electrode positions. Workflow using modeling results and consideration of dosage in previous clinical trials was incorporated. Prior ad hoc adult montages vs. de novo optimized montages provided distinct risk benefit analysis. Approximating adult dose required consideration of changes in both peak brain current flow and distribution which further tradeoff between maximizing efficacy and adding safety factors. Electrode size, position, current intensity, compliance voltage, and duration were controlled independently in this process. Results: Brain electric fields modeled and compared to values previously predicted models (Datta et al., 2011; Minhas et al., 2012). Approximating conservative brain current flow patterns and intensities used in previous adult trials for comparable indications, the optimal current intensity established was 0.7 mA for 10 min with a tDCS C3/C4 montage. Specifically 0.7 mA produced comparable peak brain current intensity of an average adult receiving 1.0 mA. Electrode size of 5 × 7 cm(2) with 1.0 mA and low-voltage tDCS was employed to maximize tolerability. Safety and feasibility confirmed with subject tolerating the session well and no serious adverse events. Conclusion: Rational approaches to dose customization, with steps informed by computational modeling, may improve guidance for pediatric stroke tDCS trials. Frontiers Media S.A. 2014-09-19 /pmc/articles/PMC4168687/ /pubmed/25285077 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00739 Text en Copyright © 2014 Gillick, Kirton, Carmel, Minhas and Bikson. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Neuroscience
Gillick, Bernadette T.
Kirton, Adam
Carmel, Jason B.
Minhas, Preet
Bikson, Marom
Pediatric stroke and transcranial direct current stimulation: methods for rational individualized dose optimization
title Pediatric stroke and transcranial direct current stimulation: methods for rational individualized dose optimization
title_full Pediatric stroke and transcranial direct current stimulation: methods for rational individualized dose optimization
title_fullStr Pediatric stroke and transcranial direct current stimulation: methods for rational individualized dose optimization
title_full_unstemmed Pediatric stroke and transcranial direct current stimulation: methods for rational individualized dose optimization
title_short Pediatric stroke and transcranial direct current stimulation: methods for rational individualized dose optimization
title_sort pediatric stroke and transcranial direct current stimulation: methods for rational individualized dose optimization
topic Neuroscience
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4168687/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25285077
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00739
work_keys_str_mv AT gillickbernadettet pediatricstrokeandtranscranialdirectcurrentstimulationmethodsforrationalindividualizeddoseoptimization
AT kirtonadam pediatricstrokeandtranscranialdirectcurrentstimulationmethodsforrationalindividualizeddoseoptimization
AT carmeljasonb pediatricstrokeandtranscranialdirectcurrentstimulationmethodsforrationalindividualizeddoseoptimization
AT minhaspreet pediatricstrokeandtranscranialdirectcurrentstimulationmethodsforrationalindividualizeddoseoptimization
AT biksonmarom pediatricstrokeandtranscranialdirectcurrentstimulationmethodsforrationalindividualizeddoseoptimization