Cost of focality in TDCS: Interindividual variability in electric fields

Background: In transcranial direct current stimulation (TDCS), electric current is applied via two large electrodes to modulate brain activity. Computational models have shown that large electrodes produce diffuse electric fields (EFs) in the brain, which depends on individual head and brain anatomy...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Marko Mikkonen, Ilkka Laakso, Satoshi Tanaka, Akimasa Hirata
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2020-01-01
Series:Brain Stimulation
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1935861X19303808
id doaj-056e0d159fcb4994af6b2b71fbb8b056
record_format Article
spelling doaj-056e0d159fcb4994af6b2b71fbb8b0562021-03-19T07:21:00ZengElsevierBrain Stimulation1935-861X2020-01-01131117124Cost of focality in TDCS: Interindividual variability in electric fieldsMarko Mikkonen0Ilkka Laakso1Satoshi Tanaka2Akimasa Hirata3Aalto University, Department of Electrical Engineering and Automation, Finland; Corresponding author., Rakentajanaukio 2, 02150, Espoo, Finland.Aalto University, Department of Electrical Engineering and Automation, FinlandHamamatsu University School of Medicine, JapanNagoya Institute of Technology, Department of Electrical and Mechanical Engineering, JapanBackground: In transcranial direct current stimulation (TDCS), electric current is applied via two large electrodes to modulate brain activity. Computational models have shown that large electrodes produce diffuse electric fields (EFs) in the brain, which depends on individual head and brain anatomy. Recently, smaller electrodes as well as novel electrode arrangements, including high-definition TDCS (HD-TDCS) montages, have been introduced to improve the focality of EFs. Here, we investigated whether the EFs of focal montages are more susceptible to interindividual anatomical differences. Methods: Thirteen TDCS montages, including conventional M1-contralateral forehead montages with different stimulating electrode sizes as well as 4 × 1 HD and bipolar HD montages, producing varying EF focalities were modeled using the finite element method in 77 subjects, with individual anatomically realistic models based on magnetic resonance images. Results: Interindividual variability of predicted EFs increased with EF focality for conventional M1-contralateral forehead and 4 × 1 HD montages. 4 × 1 HD-TDCS was found to have the highest EF focality and greatest variability. Bipolar HD montages targeting the region between two small electrodes did not follow this pattern, but produced EF magnitudes comparable to those of 4× 1 HD-TDCS, with a minor decrease in focality and lower interindividual variability. Conclusions: EF focality in TDCS was achieved at the cost of increased interindividual variability. Hence, individual modeling is required to plan EF doses when focal montages are used. Among the studied montages, bipolar HD montages provided a compromise between inter-individual variability, focality and magnitude of the predicted EFs.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1935861X19303808TDCSFocalityHD-TDCSInterindividual variabilityElectric field
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Marko Mikkonen
Ilkka Laakso
Satoshi Tanaka
Akimasa Hirata
spellingShingle Marko Mikkonen
Ilkka Laakso
Satoshi Tanaka
Akimasa Hirata
Cost of focality in TDCS: Interindividual variability in electric fields
Brain Stimulation
TDCS
Focality
HD-TDCS
Interindividual variability
Electric field
author_facet Marko Mikkonen
Ilkka Laakso
Satoshi Tanaka
Akimasa Hirata
author_sort Marko Mikkonen
title Cost of focality in TDCS: Interindividual variability in electric fields
title_short Cost of focality in TDCS: Interindividual variability in electric fields
title_full Cost of focality in TDCS: Interindividual variability in electric fields
title_fullStr Cost of focality in TDCS: Interindividual variability in electric fields
title_full_unstemmed Cost of focality in TDCS: Interindividual variability in electric fields
title_sort cost of focality in tdcs: interindividual variability in electric fields
publisher Elsevier
series Brain Stimulation
issn 1935-861X
publishDate 2020-01-01
description Background: In transcranial direct current stimulation (TDCS), electric current is applied via two large electrodes to modulate brain activity. Computational models have shown that large electrodes produce diffuse electric fields (EFs) in the brain, which depends on individual head and brain anatomy. Recently, smaller electrodes as well as novel electrode arrangements, including high-definition TDCS (HD-TDCS) montages, have been introduced to improve the focality of EFs. Here, we investigated whether the EFs of focal montages are more susceptible to interindividual anatomical differences. Methods: Thirteen TDCS montages, including conventional M1-contralateral forehead montages with different stimulating electrode sizes as well as 4 × 1 HD and bipolar HD montages, producing varying EF focalities were modeled using the finite element method in 77 subjects, with individual anatomically realistic models based on magnetic resonance images. Results: Interindividual variability of predicted EFs increased with EF focality for conventional M1-contralateral forehead and 4 × 1 HD montages. 4 × 1 HD-TDCS was found to have the highest EF focality and greatest variability. Bipolar HD montages targeting the region between two small electrodes did not follow this pattern, but produced EF magnitudes comparable to those of 4× 1 HD-TDCS, with a minor decrease in focality and lower interindividual variability. Conclusions: EF focality in TDCS was achieved at the cost of increased interindividual variability. Hence, individual modeling is required to plan EF doses when focal montages are used. Among the studied montages, bipolar HD montages provided a compromise between inter-individual variability, focality and magnitude of the predicted EFs.
topic TDCS
Focality
HD-TDCS
Interindividual variability
Electric field
url http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1935861X19303808
work_keys_str_mv AT markomikkonen costoffocalityintdcsinterindividualvariabilityinelectricfields
AT ilkkalaakso costoffocalityintdcsinterindividualvariabilityinelectricfields
AT satoshitanaka costoffocalityintdcsinterindividualvariabilityinelectricfields
AT akimasahirata costoffocalityintdcsinterindividualvariabilityinelectricfields
_version_ 1724213600433733632