Regulation and Ethics of Transcranial Electrical Stimulation: A General View

Electroceutical and Bioelectric Therapy: Its Advantages and Limitations

Given the long history, the field of electroceutical and bioelectric therapy has grown impressively, recognized as the main modality of mental health treatments along with psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy. Electroceutical and bioelectric therapy comprises electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), vagus nerve stimulation (VNS), repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), deep brain stimulation (DBS), transcranial electrical stimulation (tES), and other brain stimulation techniques. Much empirical research has been published regarding the application guidelines, mechanism of action, and efficacy of respective brain stimulation techniques, but no comparative study that delineates the advantages and limitations of each therapy exists for a comprehensive understanding of each technique. This review provides a comparison of existing electroceutical and bioelectric techniques, primarily focusing on the therapeutic advantages and limitations of each therapy in the current electroceutical and bioelectric field.

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

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.