Evaluation of local electric fields generated by transcranial direct current stimulation with an extracephalic reference electrode based on realistic 3D body modeling

2012 ◽  
Vol 57 (8) ◽  
pp. 2137-2150 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chang-Hwan Im ◽  
Ji-Hye Park ◽  
Miseon Shim ◽  
Won Hyuk Chang ◽  
Yun-Hee Kim
2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gábor Csifcsák ◽  
Nya Mehnwolo Boayue ◽  
Oula Puonti ◽  
Axel Thielscher ◽  
Matthias Mittner

Background: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) above the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (lDLPFC) has been widely used to improve symptoms of major depressive disorder (MDD). However, the effects of different stimulation protocols in the entire frontal lobe have not been investigated in a large sample including patient data.Methods: We used 38 head models created from structural magnetic resonance imaging data of 19 healthy adults and 19 MDD patients and applied computational modeling to simulate the spatial distribution of tDCS-induced electric fields (EFs) in 20 frontal regions. We evaluated effects of seven bipolar and two multi-electrode 4x1 tDCS protocols.Results: For bipolar montages, EFs were of comparable strength in the lDLPFC and in the medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC). Depending on stimulation parameters, EF cortical maps varied to a considerable degree, but were found to be similar in controls and patients. 4x1 montages produced more localized, albeit weaker effects.Limitations: White matter anisotropy was not modeled. The relationship between EF strength and clinical response to tDCS could not be evaluated.Conclusions: In addition to lDLPFC stimulation, excitability changes in the MPFC should also be considered as a potential mechanism underlying clinical efficacy of bipolar montages. MDD-associated anatomical variations are not likely to substantially influence current flow. Individual modeling of tDCS protocols can substantially improve cortical targeting. We make recommendations for future research to explicitly test the contribution of lDLPFC vs. MPFC stimulation to therapeutic outcomes of tDCS in this disorder.


2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 727-733 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pratik Y. Chhatbar ◽  
Steven A. Kautz ◽  
Istvan Takacs ◽  
Nathan C. Rowland ◽  
Gonzalo J. Revuelta ◽  
...  

Stroke ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 49 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Pratik Y Chhatbar ◽  
Steven A Kautz ◽  
Istvan Takacs ◽  
Nathan C Rowland ◽  
Gonzalo J Revuelta ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. e8
Author(s):  
Pratik Y. Chhatbar ◽  
Steven A. Kautz ◽  
Istvan Takacs ◽  
Nathan C. Rowland ◽  
Gonzalo J. Revuelta ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberto Esposti ◽  
Silvia M. Marchese ◽  
Veronica Farinelli ◽  
Francesco Bolzoni ◽  
Paolo Cavallari

Evidence shows that the postural and focal components within the voluntary motor command are functionally unique. In 2015, we reported that the supplementary motor area (SMA) processes Anticipatory Postural Adjustments (APAs) separately from the command to focal muscles, so we are still searching for a hierarchically higher area able to process both components. Among these, the parietal operculum (PO) seemed to be a good candidate, as it is a hub integrating both sensory and motor streams. However, in 2019, we reported that transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS), applied with an active electrode on the PO contralateral to the moving segment vs. a larger reference electrode on the opposite forehead, did not affect intra-limb APAs associated to brisk flexions of the index-finger. Nevertheless, literature reports that two active electrodes of opposite polarities, one on each PO (dual-hemisphere, dh-tDCS), elicit stronger effects than the “active vs. reference” arrangement. Thus, in the present study, the same intra-limb APAs were recorded before, during and after dh-tDCS on PO. Twenty right-handed subjects were tested, 10 for each polarity: anode on the left vs. cathode on the right, and vice versa. Again, dh-tDCS was ineffective on APA amplitude and timing, as well as on prime mover recruitment and index-finger kinematics. These results confirm the conclusion that PO does not take part in intra-limb APA control. Therefore, our search for an area in which the motor command to prime mover and postural muscles are still processed together will have to address other structures.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document