Transcranial electrical stimulation motor threshold can estimate individualized tDCS dosage from reverse-calculation electric-field modeling

被引:55
作者
Caulfield, Kevin A. [1 ]
Badran, Bashar W. [1 ]
DeVries, William H. [1 ]
Summers, Philipp M. [1 ]
Kofmehl, Emma [1 ]
Li, Xingbao [1 ]
Borckardt, Jeffrey J. [1 ]
Bikson, Marom [2 ]
George, Mark S. [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Med Univ South Carolina, Dept Psychiat, Brain Stimulat Lab, 67 President St,502N, Charleston, SC 29425 USA
[2] CUNY City Coll, Dept Biomed Engn, New York, NY USA
[3] Ralph H Johnson VA Med Ctr, Charleston, SC USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
tDCS; Individualized dosing; tDCS dosing; Electric field modeling; Transcranial direct current stimulation; Transcranial electrical stimulation; Transcranial magnetic stimulation; WORKING-MEMORY; CONTROLLED TRIAL; DOSE-RESPONSE; INTENSITY; CORTEX; BRAIN; VARIABILITY; EXCITABILITY; ENHANCEMENT; SENSITIVITY;
D O I
10.1016/j.brs.2020.04.007
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Unique amongst brain stimulation tools, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) currently lacks an easy or widely implemented method for individualizing dosage. Objective: We developed a method of reverse-calculating electric-field (E-field) models based on Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scans that can estimate individualized tDCS dose. We also evaluated an MRI-free method of individualizing tDCS dose by measuring transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) motor threshold (MT) and single pulse, suprathreshold transcranial electrical stimulation (TES) MT and regressing it against E-field modeling. Key assumptions of reverse-calculation E-field modeling, including the size of region of interest (ROI) analysis and the linearity of multiple E-field models were also tested. Methods: In 29 healthy adults, we acquired TMS MT, TES MT, and anatomical T1-weighted MPRAGE MRI scans with a fiducial marking the motor hotspot. We then computed a "reverse-calculated tDCS dose" of tDCS applied at the scalp needed to cause a 1.00 V/m E-field at the cortex. Finally, we examined whether the predicted E-field values correlated with each participant's measured TMS MT or TES MT. Results: We were able to determine a reverse-calculated tDCS dose for each participant using a 5 x 5 x 5 voxel grid region of interest (ROI) approach (average = 6.03 mA, SD = 1.44 mA, range = 3.75-9.74 mA). The Transcranial Electrical Stimulation MT, but not the Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation MT, significantly correlated with the ROI-based reverse-calculated tDCS dose determined by E-field modeling (R-2 = 0.45, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Reverse-calculation E-field modeling, alone or regressed against TES MT, shows promise as a method to individualize tDCS dose. The large range of the reverse-calculated tDCS doses between subjects underscores the likely need to individualize tDCS dose. Future research should further examine the use of TES MT to individually dose tDCS as an MRI-free method of dosing tDCS. (C) 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:961 / 969
页数:9
相关论文
共 80 条
  • [1] Daily transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) leads to greater increases in cortical excitability than second daily transcranial direct current stimulation
    Alonzo, Angelo
    Brassil, Joseph
    Taylor, Janet L.
    Martin, Donel
    Loo, Colleen K.
    [J]. BRAIN STIMULATION, 2012, 5 (03) : 208 - 213
  • [2] Are EMG and visual observation comparable in determining resting motor threshold? A reexamination after twenty years
    Badran, Bashar W.
    Ly, Martina
    DeVries, William H.
    Glusman, Chloe E.
    Willis, Angela
    Pridmore, Saxby
    George, Mark S.
    [J]. BRAIN STIMULATION, 2019, 12 (02) : 364 - 366
  • [3] Badran BW, 2020, BRAIN STIMULATION BA
  • [4] Partially non-linear stimulation intensity-dependent effects of direct current stimulation on motor cortex excitability in humans
    Batsikadze, G.
    Moliadze, V.
    Paulus, W.
    Kuo, M. -F.
    Nitsche, M. A.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PHYSIOLOGY-LONDON, 2013, 591 (07): : 1987 - 2000
  • [5] Safety of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation: Evidence Based Update 2016
    Bikson, Marom
    Grossman, Pnina
    Thomas, Chris
    Zannou, Adantchede Louis
    Jiang, Jimmy
    Adnan, Tatheer
    Mourdoukoutas, Antonios P.
    Kronberg, Greg
    Truong, Dennis
    Boggio, Paulo
    Brunoni, Andre R.
    Charvet, Leigh
    Fregni, Felipe
    Fritsch, Brita
    Gillick, Bernadette
    Hamilton, Roy H.
    Hampstead, Benjamin M.
    Jankord, Ryan
    Kirton, Adam
    Knotkova, Helena
    Liebetanz, David
    Liu, Anli
    Loo, Colleen
    Nitsche, Michael A.
    Reis, Janine
    Richardson, Jessica D.
    Rotenberg, Alexander
    Turkeltaub, Peter E.
    Woods, Adam J.
    [J]. BRAIN STIMULATION, 2016, 9 (05) : 641 - 661
  • [6] Computational Models of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation
    Bikson, Marom
    Rahman, Asif
    Datta, Abhishek
    [J]. CLINICAL EEG AND NEUROSCIENCE, 2012, 43 (03) : 176 - 183
  • [7] High-Resolution Modeling Assisted Design of Customized and Individualized Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Protocols
    Bikson, Marom
    Rahman, Asif
    Datta, Abhishek
    Fregni, Felipe
    Merabet, Lotfi
    [J]. NEUROMODULATION, 2012, 15 (04): : 306 - 315
  • [8] Blumberger Daniel M, 2012, Front Psychiatry, V3, P74, DOI 10.3389/fpsyt.2012.00074
  • [9] Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on working memory in patients with Parkinson's disease
    Boggio, Paulo S.
    Ferrucci, Roberta
    Rigonatti, Sergio P.
    Covre, Priscila
    Nitsche, Michael
    Pascual-Leone, Alvaro
    Fregni, Felipe
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE NEUROLOGICAL SCIENCES, 2006, 249 (01) : 31 - 38
  • [10] Direct current stimulation of endothelial monolayers induces a transient and reversible increase in transport due to the electroosmotic effect
    Cancel, Limary M.
    Arias, Katherin
    Bikson, Marom
    Tarbell, John M.
    [J]. SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2018, 8