Optimized APPS-tDCS electrode position, size, and distance doubles the on-target stimulation magnitude in 3000 electric field models

Transcranial direct current stimulation enhances effort maintenance in ADHD

BACKGROUND

Youth with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) exhibit increased effort aversion, likely due to deficits in anticipatory dopamine firing. Previous research has shown that transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) targeting the right prefrontal cortex can enhance activity in dopaminergic meso-striatal regions. However, the extent to which this specific tDCS configuration effectively modulates effort behavior in anticipation of rewards in ADHD remains uncertain.

HYPOTHESIS

We expected an increase of effort maintenance and invigoration during and following our tDCS set-up compared to sham in subjects with ADHD.

METHODS

Twenty-four children and adolescents with ADHD (mean age: 11.6 years; 95% CI [10.7, 12.4]) received 2mA and sham tDCS for twenty minutes each. The anode was positioned over the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (PFC), while the cathode was placed over the right dorsolateral PFC, generating an electrical field with maximal strength in the right PFC. During and after the tDCS sessions, participants performed a button-pressing task aimed at earning delayed monetary rewards. Primary outcomes were effort maintenance (frequency of button presses) and invigoration (slopes of button presses), measuring motor task performance.

RESULTS

We observed a significant increase in effort maintenance both during (b = 2.66; p<.001) and after tDCS (b = 2.04; p= .007) compared to sham. No significant difference was found for invigoration during stimulation, while after bonferroni correction (p=.025) a non-significant decrease was found after sham compared to tDCS (b=-5.18; p= .041).

CONCLUSION

tDCS targeting the ventromedial PFC (anodal) and right dorsolateral PFC (cathodal) increases effort maintenance in children and adolescents with ADHD.

Facilitation of Early and Middle Latency SEP after tDCS of M1: No Evidence of Primary Somatosensory Homeostatic Plasticity

Homeostatic plasticity is a mechanism that stabilizes cortical excitability within a physiological range. Most homeostatic plasticity protocols have primed and tested the homeostatic response of the primary motor cortex (M1). This study investigated if a homeostatic response could be recorded from the primary sensory cortex (S1) after inducing homeostatic plasticity in M1. In 31 healthy participants, homeostatic plasticity was induced over M1 with a priming and testing block of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in two different sessions (anodal and cathodal). S1 excitability was assessed by early (N20, P25) and middle-latency (N33-P45) somatosensory evoked potentials (SEP) extracted from 4 electrodes (CP5, CP3, P5, P3). Baseline and post-measures (post-priming, 0-min, 10-min, and 20-min after homeostatic induction) were taken. Anodal M1 homeostatic plasticity induction significantly facilitated the N20-P25, P45 peak, and N33-P45 early SEP components up to 20-min post-induction, without any indication of a homeostatic response (i.e., reduced SEP). Cathodal homeostatic induction did not induce any significant effect on early or middle latency SEPs. M1 homeostatic plasticity induction by anodal stimulation protocol to the primary motor cortex did not induce a homeostatic response in SEPs.

Addressing the sources of inter-subject variability in E-field parameters in anodal tDCS stimulation over motor cortical network

Objetive: .Although transcranial direct current stimulation constitutes a non-invasive neuromodulation technique with promising results in a great variety of applications, its clinical implementation is compromised by the high inter-subject variability reported. This study aims to analyze the inter-subject variability in electric fields (E-fields) over regions of the cortical motor network under two electrode montages: the classical C3Fp2 and an alternative P3F3, which confines more the E-field over this region.Approach.Computational models of the head of 98 healthy subjects were developed to simulate the E-field under both montages. E-field parameters such as magnitude, focality and orientation were calculated over three regions of interest (ROI): M1S1, supplementary motor area (SMA) and preSMA. The role of anatomical characteristics as a source of inter-subject variability on E-field parameters and individualized stimulation intensity were addressed using linear mixed-effect models.Main results.P3F3 showed a more confined E-field distribution over M1S1 than C3Fp2; the latter elicited higher E-fields over supplementary motor areas. Both montages showed high inter-subject variability, especially for the normal component over C3Fp2. Skin, bone and CSF ROI volumes showed a negative association with E-field magnitude irrespective of montage. Grey matter volume and montage were the main sources of variability for focality. The curvature of gyri was found to be significantly associated with the variability of normal E-fields.Significance.Computational modeling proves useful in the assessment of E-field variability. Our simulations predict significant differences in E-field magnitude and focality for C3Fp2 and P3F3. However, anatomical characteristics were also found to be significant sources of E-field variability irrespective of electrode montage. The normal E-field component better captured the individual variability and low rate of responder subjects observed in experimental studies.

Closed-Loop Transcranial Electrical Neurostimulation for Sustained Attention Enhancement: A Pilot Study towards Personalized Intervention Strategies

Sustained attention is pivotal for tasks like studying and working for which focus and low distractions are necessary for peak productivity. This study explores the effectiveness of adaptive transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in either the frontal or parietal region to enhance sustained attention. The research involved ten healthy university students performing the Continuous Performance Task-AX (AX-CPT) while receiving either frontal or parietal tDCS. The study comprised three phases. First, we acquired the electroencephalography (EEG) signal to identify the most suitable metrics related to attention states. Among different spectral and complexity metrics computed on 3 s epochs of EEG, the Fuzzy Entropy and Multiscale Sample Entropy Index of frontal channels were selected. Secondly, we assessed how tDCS at a fixed 1.0 mA current affects attentional performance. Finally, a real-time experiment involving continuous metric monitoring allowed personalized dynamic optimization of the current amplitude and stimulation site (frontal or parietal). The findings reveal statistically significant improvements in mean accuracy (94.04 vs. 90.82%) and reaction times (262.93 vs. 302.03 ms) with the adaptive tDCS compared to a non-stimulation condition. Average reaction times were statistically shorter during adaptive stimulation compared to a fixed current amplitude condition (262.93 vs. 283.56 ms), while mean accuracy stayed similar (94.04 vs. 93.36%, improvement not statistically significant). Despite the limited number of subjects, this work points out the promising potential of adaptive tDCS as a tailored treatment for enhancing sustained attention.

Individual and group-level optimization of electric field in deep brain region during multichannel transcranial electrical stimulation

Electrode montage optimization for transcranial electric stimulation (tES) is a challenging topic for targeting a specific brain region. Targeting the deep brain region is difficult due to tissue inhomogeneity, resulting in complex current flow. In this study, a simplified protocol for montage optimization is proposed for multichannel tES (mc-tES). The purpose of this study was to reduce the computational cost for mc-tES optimization and to evaluate the mc-tES for deep brain regions. Optimization was performed using a simplified protocol for montages under safety constraints with 20 anatomical head models. The optimization procedure is simplified using the surface EF of the deep brain target region, considering its small volume and non-concentric distribution of the electrodes. Our proposal demonstrated that the computational cost was reduced by >90%. A total of six-ten electrodes were necessary for robust EF in the target region. The optimization with surface EF is comparable to or marginally better than using conventional volumetric EF for deep brain tissues. An electrode montage with a mean injection current amplitude derived from individual analysis was demonstrated to be useful for targeting the deep region at the group level. The optimized montage and injection current were derived at the group level. Our proposal at individual and group levels showed great potential for clinical application.

Optimizing electrode placement for transcranial direct current stimulation in nonsuperficial cortical regions: a computational modeling study

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a noninvasive brain stimulation technique for modulating neuronal excitability by sending a weak current through electrodes attached to the scalp. For decades, the conventional tDCS electrode for stimulating the superficial cortex has been widely reported. However, the investigation of the optimal electrode to effectively stimulate the nonsuperficial cortex is still lacking. In the current study, the optimal tDCS electrode montage that can deliver the maximum electric field to nonsuperficial cortical regions is investigated. Two finite element head models were used for computational simulation to determine the optimal montage for four different nonsuperficial regions: the left foot motor cortex, the left dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (dmPFC), the left medial orbitofrontal cortex (mOFC), and the primary visual cortex (V1). Our findings showed a good consistency in the optimal montage between two models, which led to the anode and cathode being attached to C4-C3 for the foot motor, F4-F3 for the dmPFC, Fp2-F7 for the mOFC, and Oz-Cz for V1. Our suggested montages are expected to enhance the overall effectiveness of stimulation of nonsuperficial cortical areas.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13534-023-00335-2.

Determination of optimal injection current pattern for multichannel transcranial electrical stimulation without individual MRI using multiple head models

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Multichannel transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) is widely used to achieve improved stimulation focality. In the multichannel tES, the injection current pattern is generally determined through an optimization process with a finite element (FE) head model extracted from individual magnetic resonance images (MRIs). Although using an individual head model ensures the best outcome, acquiring MRIs of individual subjects in many practical applications is often difficult. Alternatively, a standard head model can be used to determine the optimal injection current pattern to stimulate a specific target; however, this may result in a relatively inaccurate delivery of stimulation current owing to the difference in individual anatomical structures. To address this issue, we propose a new approach for determining the injection current pattern using multiple head models, which can improve the stimulation focality compared to that achieved with a single standard head model.

METHODS

Twenty FE head models were used to optimize the injection current patterns to stimulate three cortical regions that are widely considered targets for tES. The individual injection current patterns were then averaged to obtain each target's mean injection current pattern. The stimulation focality for each target was then calculated by applying different current patterns (the mean current, individual current, and current from a standard model).

RESULTS

Our results showed that the stimulation focality obtained using the mean injection current pattern was significantly higher than that obtained using the injection current pattern from a standard head model. Additionally, our results demonstrated that a minimum of 13 head models are required to determine mean current pattern, allowing for a higher stimulation focality than when using the current from a standard head model.

CONCLUSIONS

Hence, using multiple head models can provide a viable solution for improving the stimulation efficacy of multichannel tES when individual MRIs are not available.

Are we really targeting and stimulating DLPFC by placing transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) electrodes over F3/F4?

In many clinical trials involving transcranial electrical stimulation (tES), target electrodes are typically placed over DLPFC with the assumption that this will primarily stimulate the underlying brain region. However, our study aimed to evaluate the electric fields (EF) that are actually delivered and identify prefrontal regions that may be inadvertently targeted in DLPFC tES. Head models were generated from the Human Connectome Project database's T1 + T2-weighted MRIs of 80 healthy adults. Two common DLPFC montages were simulated; symmetric-F4/F3, and asymmetric-F4/Fp1. Averaged EF was extracted from (1) the center of the target electrode (F4), and (2) the top 1% of voxels showing the strongest EF in individualized EF maps. Interindividual variabilities were quantified with the standard deviation of EF peak location/value. Similar steps were repeated with 66 participants with methamphetamine use disorder (MUDs) as an independent clinical population. In healthy adults, the group-level location of EF peaks was situated in the medial-frontopolar, and the individualized EF peaks were positioned in a cube with a volume of 29 cm3 /46 cm3 (symmetric/asymmetric montages). EFs in the frontopolar area were significantly higher than EF "under" the target electrode in both symmetric (peak: 0.41 ± 0.06, F4:0.22 ± 0.04) and asymmetric (peak: 0.38 ± 0.04, F4:0.2 ± 0.04) montages (Heges'g > 0.7). Similar results with slight between-group differences were found in MUDs. We highlighted that in common DLPFC tES montages, in addition to interindividual/intergroup variability, the frontopolar received the highest EFs rather than DLPFC as the main target. We specifically recommended considering the potential involvement of the frontopolar area as a mechanism underlying the effectiveness of DLPFC tES protocols.

Outcome measures for electric field modeling in tES and TMS: A systematic review and large-scale modeling study

BACKGROUND

Electric field (E-field) modeling is a potent tool to estimate the amount of transcranial magnetic and electrical stimulation (TMS and tES, respectively) that reaches the cortex and to address the variable behavioral effects observed in the field. However, outcome measures used to quantify E-fields vary considerably and a thorough comparison is missing.

OBJECTIVES

This two-part study aimed to examine the different outcome measures used to report on tES and TMS induced E-fields, including volume- and surface-level gray matter, region of interest (ROI), whole brain, geometrical, structural, and percentile-based approaches. The study aimed to guide future research in informed selection of appropriate outcome measures.

METHODS

Three electronic databases were searched for tES and/or TMS studies quantifying E-fields. The identified outcome measures were compared across volume- and surface-level E-field data in ten tES and TMS modalities targeting two common targets in 100 healthy individuals.

RESULTS

In the systematic review, we extracted 308 outcome measures from 202 studies that adopted either a gray matter volume-level (n = 197) or surface-level (n = 111) approach. Volume-level results focused on E-field magnitude, while surface-level data encompassed E-field magnitude (n = 64) and normal/tangential E-field components (n = 47). E-fields were extracted in ROIs, such as brain structures and shapes (spheres, hexahedra and cylinders), or the whole brain. Percentiles or mean values were mostly used to quantify E-fields. Our modeling study, which involved 1,000 E-field models and > 1,000,000 extracted E-field values, revealed that different outcome measures yielded distinct E-field values, analyzed different brain regions, and did not always exhibit strong correlations in the same within-subject E-field model.

CONCLUSIONS

Outcome measure selection significantly impacts the locations and intensities of extracted E-field data in both tES and TMS E-field models. The suitability of different outcome measures depends on the target region, TMS/tES modality, individual anatomy, the analyzed E-field component and the research question. To enhance the quality, rigor, and reproducibility in the E-field modeling domain, we suggest standard reporting practices across studies and provide four recommendations.

Template MRI scans reliably approximate individual and group-level tES and TMS electric fields induced in motor and prefrontal circuits

Background

Electric field (E-field) modeling is a valuable method of elucidating the cortical target engagement from transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and transcranial electrical stimulation (tES), but it is typically dependent on individual MRI scans. In this study, we systematically tested whether E-field models in template MNI-152 and Ernie scans can reliably approximate group-level E-fields induced in N = 195 individuals across 5 diagnoses (healthy, alcohol use disorder, tobacco use disorder, anxiety, depression).

Methods

We computed 788 E-field models using the CHARM-SimNIBS 4.0.0 pipeline with 4 E-field models per participant (motor and prefrontal targets for TMS and tES). We additionally calculated permutation analyses to determine the point of stability of E-fields to assess whether the 152 brains represented in the MNI-152 template is sufficient.

Results

Group-level E-fields did not significantly differ between the individual vs. MNI-152 template and Ernie scans for any stimulation modality or location (p > 0.05). However, TMS-induced E-field magnitudes significantly varied by diagnosis; individuals with generalized anxiety had significantly higher prefrontal and motor E-field magnitudes than healthy controls and those with alcohol use disorder and depression (p < 0.001). The point of stability for group-level E-field magnitudes ranged from 42 (motor tES) to 52 participants (prefrontal TMS).

Conclusion

MNI-152 and Ernie models reliably estimate group-average TMS and tES-induced E-fields transdiagnostically. The MNI-152 template includes sufficient scans to control for interindividual anatomical differences (i.e., above the point of stability). Taken together, using the MNI-152 and Ernie brains to approximate group-level E-fields is a valid and reliable approach.

An Operational Approach for Optimizing Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation technique that has been utilized for treating brain disorders and improving cognitive function. In order to achieve targeted tDCS, many optimization methods of montages and electric currents have been proposed. However, these methods have some limitations. Most of them were proposed for single-objective optimization (focality or intensity) and have no constrain with the number of electrodes (Most devices only have less than 8 electrodes currently). In this study, we proposed an operational optimization approach for well-targeted tDCS, which aims to optimize for two objectives of electric field (EF) intensity and focality with constraints on the number of electrodes. Compared with traditional tDCS in our cohort (10 subjects), our method significantly improves the EF focality. When compared to commonly used 4×1 high-definition tDCS (HD-tDCS), our method can achieve higher EF intensity in the target region with less than 8 electrodes. Our method can balance the two objectives of EF and shorten optimization time, which is convenient for practical application.

A Systematic Review and Large-Scale tES and TMS Electric Field Modeling Study Reveals How Outcome Measure Selection Alters Results in a Person- and Montage-Specific Manner

Background

Electric field (E-field) modeling is a potent tool to examine the cortical effects of transcranial magnetic and electrical stimulation (TMS and tES, respectively) and to address the high variability in efficacy observed in the literature. However, outcome measures used to report E-field magnitude vary considerably and have not yet been compared in detail.

Objectives

The goal of this two-part study, encompassing a systematic review and modeling experiment, was to provide an overview of the different outcome measures used to report the magnitude of tES and TMS E-fields, and to conduct a direct comparison of these measures across different stimulation montages.

Methods

Three electronic databases were searched for tES and/or TMS studies reporting E-field magnitude. We extracted and discussed outcome measures in studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Additionally, outcome measures were compared via models of four common tES and two TMS modalities in 100 healthy younger adults.

Results

In the systematic review, we included 118 studies using 151 outcome measures related to E-field magnitude. Structural and spherical regions of interest (ROI) analyses and percentile-based whole-brain analyses were used most often. In the modeling analyses, we found that there was an average of only 6% overlap between ROI and percentile-based whole-brain analyses in the investigated volumes within the same person. The overlap between ROI and whole-brain percentiles was montage- and person-specific, with more focal montages such as 4Ã-1 and APPS-tES, and figure-of-eight TMS showing up to 73%, 60%, and 52% overlap between ROI and percentile approaches respectively. However, even in these cases, 27% or more of the analyzed volume still differed between outcome measures in every analyses.

Conclusions

The choice of outcome measures meaningfully alters the interpretation of tES and TMS E-field models. Well-considered outcome measure selection is imperative for accurate interpretation of results, valid between-study comparisons, and depends on stimulation focality and study goals. We formulated four recommendations to increase the quality and rigor of E-field modeling outcome measures. With these data and recommendations, we hope to guide future studies towards informed outcome measure selection, and improve the comparability of studies.

Working memory ımprovement after transcranial direct current stimulation paired with working memory training ın diabetic peripheral neuropathy

Association of cognitive deficits and diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) is frequent. Working memory (WM) deficits result in impairment of daily activities, diminished functionality, and treatment compliance. Mounting evidence suggests that transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) with concurrent working memory training (WMT) ameliorates cognitive deficits. Emboldening results of tDCS were shown in DPN. The study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of anodal tDCS over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) coupled with cathodal right DLPFC with concurrent WMT in DPN for the first time. The present randomized triple-blind parallel-group sham-controlled study evaluated the efficacy of 5 sessions of tDCS over the DLPFC concurrent with WMT in 28 individuals with painful DPN on cognitive (primary) and pain-related, psychiatric outcome measures before, immediately after, and 1-month after treatment protocol. tDCS enhanced the efficacy of WMT on working memory and yielded lower anxiety levels than sham tDCS but efficacy was not superior to sham on other cognitive domains, pain severity, quality of life, and depression. tDCS with concurrent WMT enhanced WM and ameliorated anxiety in DPN without affecting other cognitive and pain-related outcomes. Further research scrutinizing the short/long-term efficacy with larger samples is accredited.