In silico modeling of electric field modulation by transcranial direct current stimulation in stroke patients with skull burr holes: Implications for safe clinical application

被引：1

作者：

Yoon, Mi-Jeong ^{[1
]}

Kim, Hyungtaek ^{[2
,3
,4
]}

Yoo, Yeun Jie ^{[1
]}

Im, Sun ^{[5
]}

Kim, Tae-Woo ^{[6
]}

Dhaher, Yasin Y. ^{[3
,4
]}

Kim, Donghyeon ^{[2
]}

Lim, Seong Hoon ^{[7
,8
]}

机构：

[1] Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, St. Vincent's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea

[2] Research Institute, Neurophet Inc., Seoul

[3] Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX

[4] Department of Bioengineering, University of Texas at Dallas, Dallas, TX

[5] Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Bucheon St Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea

[6] Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, National Traffic Injury Rehabilitation Hospital, Gyeongki-do

[7] Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea

[8] CMC Institute for Basic Medical Science, The Catholic Medical Center, The Catholic University of Korea

来源：

Computers in Biology and Medicine | 2025年 / 184卷

基金：

新加坡国家研究基金会;

关键词：

Burr hole; Computer simulation; Electric field; In silico modeling; Neuromodulation; tDCS;

D O I：

10.1016/j.compbiomed.2024.109366

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

Background: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has emerged as a promising tool for stroke rehabilitation, supported by evidence demonstrating its beneficial effects on post-stroke recovery. However, patients with skull defects, such as burr holes, have been excluded from tDCS due to limited knowledge regarding the effect of skull defects on the electric field. Objective: We investigated the effect of burr holes on the electric field induced by tDCS and identified the electrode location that modulates the electric field. Methods: We generated mesh models of the heads of five patients with burr holes and five age-matched control patients who had never undergone brain surgery, based on magnetic resonance imaging. Then we conducted tDCS simulations, with the cathode fixed in one position and the anode in various positions. Regression analysis was employed to investigate the relationship between the electric field at the burr hole and the distance from the burr hole to the anode. Results: In patients with burr holes, the electric field intensity increased as the anode approached the burr hole, reaching a maximum electric field when the anode covered it, with this pattern remaining consistent across all patient models. Assuming the holes were filled with cerebrospinal fluid, the maximum electric field was 1.20 ± 0.20 V/m (mean ± standard deviation, SD). When the anode was positioned more than 60 mm away from the burr hole, the electric field at the burr hole remained low and constant, with an average value of 0.29 ± 0.04V/m (mean ± SD). In contrast, for all patients without burr holes, the electric field intensity stayed constant regardless of the anode's position, with a maximum amplitude of 0.36 ± 0.04 V/m (mean ± SD). Furthermore, when the burr hole was assumed to be filled with scar tissue, the mean peak electric field was 0.93 ± 0.16 V/m, indicating that the electric field strength varies depending on the conductivity of the tissue filling the burr hole. Conclusion: Based on the simulations, the minimum recommended distance from the burr hole to the anode is 60 mm to prevent unintended stimulation of the brain cortex during tDCS. These findings will contribute to the development of safe and effective tDCS treatments for patients with burr holes. © 2024

引用

共 48 条

[11]

Fridriksson J., Hillis A.E., Current approaches to the treatment of post-stroke aphasia, J Stroke, 23, pp. 183-201, (2021)

[12]

Zhao N., Sun W., Xiao Z., Fan C., Zeng B., Xu K., Liao M., Lu W., Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on poststroke dysphagia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil., 103, pp. 1436-1447, (2022)

[13]

Palm U., Kumpf U., Behler N., Wulf L., Kirsch B., Worsching J., Keeser D., Hasan A., Padberg F., Home use, remotely supervised, and remotely controlled transcranial direct current stimulation: a systematic review of the available evidence, Neuromodulation, 21, pp. 323-333, (2018)

[14]

Ko M.H., Safety of transcranial direct current stimulation in neurorehabilitation, Brain Neurorehabil, 14, (2021)

[15]

Feng W., Kautz S.A., Schlaug G., Meinzer C., George M.S., Chhatbar P.Y., Transcranial direct current stimulation for poststroke motor recovery: challenges and opportunities, Pharm. Manag. PM R, 10, pp. S157-S164, (2018)

[16]

Bikson M., Grossman P., Thomas C., Zannou A.L., Jiang J., Adnan T., Mourdoukoutas A.P., Kronberg G., Truong D., Boggio P., Brunoni A.R., Charvet L., Fregni F., Fritsch B., Gillick B., Hamilton R.H., Hampstead B.M., Jankord R., Kirton A., Knotkova H., Liebetanz D., Liu A., Loo C., Nitsche M.A., Reis J., Richardson J.D., Rotenberg A., Turkeltaub P.E., Woods A.J., Safety of transcranial direct current stimulation: evidence based update 2016, Brain Stimul., 9, pp. 641-661, (2016)

[17]

Datta A., Bikson M., Fregni F., Transcranial direct current stimulation in patients with skull defects and skull plates: high-resolution computational FEM study of factors altering cortical current flow, Neuroimage, 52, pp. 1268-1278, (2010)

[18]

Lee J., Lee M., Lee J., Kim R.E.Y., Lim S.H., Kim D., Fine-grained brain tissue segmentation for brain modeling of stroke patient, Comput. Biol. Med., 153, (2023)

[19]

Dice L.R., Measures of the amount of ecologic association between species, Ecology, 26, pp. 297-302, (1945)

[20]

Gabriel C., Gabriel S., Corthout E., The dielectric properties of biological tissues: I. Literature survey, Phys. Med. Biol., 41, pp. 2231-2249, (1996)

← 1 2 3 4 5 →