Dataset Information

A Method to Experimentally Estimate the Conductivity of Chronic Stroke Lesions: A Tool to Individualize Transcranial Electric Stimulation

ABSTRACT: The inconsistent response to transcranial electric stimulation in the stroke population is attributed to, among other factors, unknown effects of stroke lesion conductivity on stimulation strength at the targeted brain areas. Volume conduction models are promising tools to determine optimal stimulation settings. However, stroke lesion conductivity is often not considered in these models as a source of inter-subject variability. The goal of this study is to propose a method that combines MRI, EEG, and transcranial stimulation to estimate the conductivity of cortical stroke lesions experimentally. In this simulation study, lesion conductivity was estimated from scalp potentials during transcranial electric stimulation in 12 chronic stroke patients. To do so, first, we determined the stimulation configuration where scalp potentials are maximally affected by the lesion. Then, we calculated scalp potentials in a model with a fixed lesion conductivity and a model with a randomly assigned conductivity. To estimate the lesion conductivity, we minimized the error between the two models by varying the conductivity in the second model. Finally, to reflect realistic experimental conditions, we test the effect rotation of measurement electrode orientation and the effect of the number of electrodes used. We found that the algorithm converged to the correct lesion conductivity value when noise on the electrode positions was absent for all lesions. Conductivity estimation error was below 5% with realistic electrode coregistration errors of 0.1° for lesions larger than 50 ml. Higher lesion conductivities and lesion volumes were associated with smaller estimation errors. In conclusion, this method can experimentally estimate stroke lesion conductivity, improving the accuracy of volume conductor models of stroke patients and potentially leading to more effective transcranial electric stimulation configurations for this population.

SUBMITTER: van der Cruijsen J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8546262 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundUnique amongst brain stimulation tools, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) currently lacks an easy or widely implemented method for individualizing dosage.ObjectiveWe 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.MethodsIn 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.ResultsWe were able to determine a reverse-calculated tDCS dose for each participant using a 5 × 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 (R2 = 0.45, p < 0.001).ConclusionsReverse-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.

Project description:Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (TDCS) are two types of non-invasive transcranial brain stimulation (TBS). They are useful tools for stroke research and may be potential adjunct therapies for functional recovery. However, stroke often causes large cerebral lesions, which are commonly accompanied by a secondary enlargement of the ventricles and atrophy. These structural alterations substantially change the conductivity distribution inside the head, which may have potentially important consequences for both brain stimulation methods. We therefore aimed to characterize the impact of these changes on the spatial distribution of the electric field generated by both TBS methods. In addition to confirming the safety of TBS in the presence of large stroke-related structural changes, our aim was to clarify whether targeted stimulation is still possible. Realistic head models containing large cortical and subcortical stroke lesions in the right parietal cortex were created using MR images of two patients. For TMS, the electric field of a double coil was simulated using the finite-element method. Systematic variations of the coil position relative to the lesion were tested. For TDCS, the finite-element method was used to simulate a standard approach with two electrode pads, and the position of one electrode was systematically varied. For both TMS and TDCS, the lesion caused electric field "hot spots" in the cortex. However, these maxima were not substantially stronger than those seen in a healthy control. The electric field pattern induced by TMS was not substantially changed by the lesions. However, the average field strength generated by TDCS was substantially decreased. This effect occurred for both head models and even when both electrodes were distant to the lesion, caused by increased current shunting through the lesion and enlarged ventricles. Judging from the similar peak field strengths compared to the healthy control, both TBS methods are safe in patients with large brain lesions (in practice, however, additional factors such as potentially lowered thresholds for seizure-induction have to be considered). Focused stimulation by TMS seems to be possible, but standard tDCS protocols appear to be less efficient than they are in healthy subjects, strongly suggesting that tDCS studies in this population might benefit from individualized treatment planning based on realistic field calculations.

Dataset Information

A Method to Experimentally Estimate the Conductivity of Chronic Stroke Lesions: A Tool to Individualize Transcranial Electric Stimulation

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets