Methods to monitor accurate and consistent electrode placements in conventional transcranial electrical stimulation

被引:13
作者
Indahlastari, Aprinda [1 ]
Albizu, Alejandro [1 ]
Nissim, Nicole R. [1 ]
Traeger, Kelsey R. [1 ]
O'Shea, Andrew [1 ]
Woods, Adam J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Florida, Dept Neurosci, Dept Clin & Hlth Psychol, Ctr Cognit Aging & Memory,McKnight Brain Inst, Gainesville, FL 32610 USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
tES; Electrode placements; Quality control; Electrode drift; CURRENT FLOW; TDCS; METAANALYSIS; INTENSITY; HEALTHY; SAFETY;
D O I
10.1016/j.brs.2018.10.016
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Inaccurate electrode placement and electrode drift during a transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) session have been shown to alter predicted field distributions in the brain and thus may contribute to a large variation in tES study outcomes. Currently, there is no objective and independent measure to quantify electrode placement accuracy/drift in tES clinical studies. Objective/hypothesis: We proposed and tested novel methods to quantify accurate and consistent electrode placements in tES using models generated from a 3D scanner. Methods: Accurate electrode placements were quantified as Discrepancy in eight tES participants by comparing landmark distances of physical electrode locations F3/F4 to their model counterparts. Distances in models were computed using curve and linear based methods. Variability of landmark locations in a single subject was computed for multiple stimulation sessions to determine consistent electrode placements across four experimenters. Main results: We obtained an average of 0.4 cm in Discrepancy, which was within the placement accuracy/drift threshold (1 cm) for conventional tES electrodes (similar to 35 cm(2)) to achieve reliable tES sessions suggested in the literature. Averaged Variability was 5.2%, with F4 electrode location as the least consistent placement. Conclusions: These methods provide objective feedback for experimenters on their performance in placing tES electrodes. Applications of these methods can be used to monitor electrode locations in tES studies of a larger cohort using F3/F4 montage and other conventional electrode arrangements. Future studies may include co-registering the landmark locations with imaging-derived head models to quantify the effects of electrode accuracy/drift on predicted field distributions in the brain. (C) 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:267 / 274
页数:8
相关论文
共 32 条
  • [1] Are current flow models for transcranial electrical stimulation fit for purpose?
    Bestmann, Sven
    Ward, Nick
    [J]. BRAIN STIMULATION, 2017, 10 (04) : 865 - 866
  • [2] 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
  • [3] Treatment-emergent mania/hypomania during antidepressant treatment with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS): A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Brunoni, Andre R.
    Moffa, Adriano H.
    Sampaio-Junior, Bernardo
    Galvez, Veronica
    Loo, Colleen K.
    [J]. BRAIN STIMULATION, 2017, 10 (02) : 260 - 262
  • [4] tDCS Effects on Verbal Fluency: A Response to Vannorsdall et al (2016)
    Cattaneo, Zaira
    Pisoni, Alberto
    Gallucci, Marcello
    Papagno, Costanza
    [J]. COGNITIVE AND BEHAVIORAL NEUROLOGY, 2016, 29 (03) : 117 - 121
  • [5] Low-Frequency Conductivity Tensor Imaging of the Human Head In Vivo Using DT-MREIT: First Study
    Chauhan, Munish
    Indahlastari, Aprinda
    Kasinadhuni, Aditya K.
    Schar, Michael
    Mareci, Thomas H.
    Sadleir, Rosalind J.
    [J]. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MEDICAL IMAGING, 2018, 37 (04) : 966 - 976
  • [6] Datta Abhishek, 2012, Front Psychiatry, V3, P91, DOI 10.3389/fpsyt.2012.00091
  • [7] Left prefrontal neuronavigated electrode localization in tDCS: 10-20 EEG system versus MRI-guided neuronavigation
    De Witte, Sara
    Klooster, Debby
    Dedoncker, Josefien
    Duprat, Romain
    Remue, Jonathan
    Baeken, Chris
    [J]. PSYCHIATRY RESEARCH-NEUROIMAGING, 2018, 274 : 1 - 6
  • [8] A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) Over the Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex in Healthy and Neuropsychiatric Samples: Influence of Stimulation Parameters
    Dedoncker, Josefien
    Brunoni, Andre R.
    Baeken, Chris
    Vanderhasselt, Marie-Anne
    [J]. BRAIN STIMULATION, 2016, 9 (04) : 501 - 517
  • [9] Incomplete evidence that increasing current intensity of tDCS boosts outcomes
    Esmaeilpour, Zeinab
    Marangolo, Paola
    Hampstead, Benjamin M.
    Bestmann, Sven
    Galletta, Elisabeth
    Knotkova, Helena
    Bikson, Marom
    [J]. BRAIN STIMULATION, 2018, 11 (02) : 310 - 321
  • [10] Non-invasive Brain Stimulation: Probing Intracortical Circuits and Improving Cognition in the Aging Brain
    Gomes-Osman, Joyce
    Indahlastari, Aprinda
    Fried, Peter J.
    Cabral, Danylo L. F.
    Rice, Jordyn
    Nissim, Nicole R.
    Aksu, Serkan
    McLaren, Molly E.
    Woods, Adam J.
    [J]. FRONTIERS IN AGING NEUROSCIENCE, 2018, 10