Determination of Current Flow Induced by Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation for the Treatment of Migraine: Potential for Optimization

Unpacking Galvanic Vestibular Stimulation using simulations and relating current flow to reported motions: Comparison across common and specialized electrode placements

BACKGROUND

Galvanic Vestibular Stimulation (GVS) is a non-invasive electrical stimulation technique that is typically used to probe the vestibular system. When using direct current or very low frequency sine, GVS causes postural sway or perception of illusory (virtual) motions. GVS is commonly delivered using two electrodes placed at the mastoids, however, placements involving additional electrodes / locations have been employed. Our objective was to systematically evaluate all known GVS electrode placements, compare induced current flow, and how it relates to the archetypal sway and virtual motions. The ultimate goal is to help users in having a better understanding of the effects of different placements.

METHODS

We simulated seven GVS electrode placements with same total injected current using an ultra-high resolution model. Induced electric field (EF) patterns at the cortical and the level of vestibular organs (left and right) were determined. A range of current flow metrics including potential factors such as inter-electrode separation, percentage of current entering the cranial cavity, and symmetricity were calculated. Finally, we relate current flow to reported GVS motions.

RESULTS

As expected, current flow patterns are electrode placement specific. Placements with two electrodes generally result in higher EF magnitude. Placements with four electrodes result in lower percentage of current entering the cranial cavity. Symmetric placements do not result in similar EF values in the left and the right organs respectively- highlighting inherent anatomical asymmetry of the human head. Asymmetric placements were found to induce as much as ~3-fold higher EF in one organ over the other. The percentage of current entering the cranial cavity varies between ~15% and ~40% depending on the placement.

CONCLUSIONS

We expect our study to advance understanding of GVS and provide insight on probable mechanism of action of a certain electrode placement choice. The dataset generated across several metrics will support hypothesis testing relating empirical outcomes to current flow patterns. Further, the differences in current flow will guide stimulation strategy (what placement and how much scalp current to use) and facilitate a quantitatively informed rational / optimal decision.

Impact of galvanic vestibular stimulation electrode current density on brain current flow patterns: Does electrode size matter?

BACKGROUND

Galvanic vestibular stimulation (GVS) uses at least one electrode placed on the mastoid process with one or multiple placed over other head areas to stimulate the vestibular system. The exact electrode size used is not given much importance in the literature and has not been reported in several studies. In a previous study, we compared the clinical effects of using different electrode sizes (3 cm2 and 35 cm2) with placebo but with the same injected current, on postural control. We observed significant improvement using the smaller size electrode but not with the bigger size electrode. The goal of this study was to simulate the current flow patterns with the intent to shed light and potentially explain the experimental outcome.

METHODS

We used an ultra-high-resolution structural dataset and developed a model to simulate the application of different electrode sizes. We considered current flow in the brain and in the vestibular labyrinth.

RESULTS

Our simulation results verified the focality increase using smaller electrodes that we postulated as the main reason for our clinical effect. The use of smaller size electrodes in combination with the montage employed also result in higher induced electric field (E-field) in the brain.

CONCLUSIONS

Electrode size and related current density is a critical parameter to characterize any GVS administration as the choice impacts the induced E-field. It is evident that the higher induced E-field likely contributed to the clinical outcome reported in our prior study.