Standard Non-Personalized Electric Field Modeling of Twenty Typical tDCS Electrode Configurations via the Computational Finite Element Method: Contributions and Limitations of Two Different Approaches

dc.contributor.authorMolero-Chamizo, Andres
dc.contributor.authorNitsche, Michael A.
dc.contributor.authorGutierrez Lerida, Carolina
dc.contributor.authorSalas Sanchez, Angeles
dc.contributor.authorMartin Riquel, Raquel
dc.contributor.authorAndujar Barroso, Rafael Tomas
dc.contributor.authorAlameda Bailen, Jose Ramon
dc.contributor.authorGarcia Palomeque, Jesus Carlos
dc.contributor.authorRivera-Urbina, Guadalupe Nathzidy
dc.contributor.authoraffiliation[Molero-Chamizo, Andres] Univ Huelva, Dept Clin & Expt Psychol, Huelva 21007, Spain
dc.contributor.authoraffiliation[Salas Sanchez, Angeles] Univ Huelva, Dept Clin & Expt Psychol, Huelva 21007, Spain
dc.contributor.authoraffiliation[Andujar Barroso, Rafael Tomas] Univ Huelva, Dept Clin & Expt Psychol, Huelva 21007, Spain
dc.contributor.authoraffiliation[Alameda Bailen, Jose Ramon] Univ Huelva, Dept Clin & Expt Psychol, Huelva 21007, Spain
dc.contributor.authoraffiliation[Nitsche, Michael A.] Leibniz Res Ctr Working Environm & Human Factors, D-44139 Dortmund, Germany
dc.contributor.authoraffiliation[Nitsche, Michael A.] Univ Med Hosp Bergmannsheil, Dept Neurol, D-44789 Bochum, Germany
dc.contributor.authoraffiliation[Gutierrez Lerida, Carolina] Univ Cordoba, Dept Psychol, Cordoba 14071, Spain
dc.contributor.authoraffiliation[Martin Riquel, Raquel] Univ Cordoba, Dept Psychol, Cordoba 14071, Spain
dc.contributor.authoraffiliation[Garcia Palomeque, Jesus Carlos] Cadiz Univ, Sch Med, Histol Dept, Cadiz 11003, Spain
dc.contributor.authoraffiliation[Garcia Palomeque, Jesus Carlos] Andalusian Hlth Serv, Dist Jerez Costa N, Cadiz 11003, Spain
dc.contributor.authoraffiliation[Rivera-Urbina, Guadalupe Nathzidy] Autonomous Univ Baja Calif, Fac Sci Adm, Psychol Ctr, Ensenada 22890, Baja California, Mexico
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-07T12:55:56Z
dc.date.available2025-01-07T12:55:56Z
dc.date.issued2021-12-01
dc.description.abstractSimple Summary The magnitude, distribution, and characteristics of the electric field induced in the brain by application of transcranial electric stimulation depend on the electrode configuration used and the specific parameters of stimulation. An approach to calculate the generated electric field is the computational finite element method. This method enables simulation of the current spread and electric field strength according to the electrode configuration and stimulation parameters used. However, current approaches have several limitations, which constrain the application of tDCS in empirical research and clinical practice. In this study, we provide examples of standard model-based electric field simulations corresponding to motor, dorsolateral prefrontal, and posterior parietal cortex stimulation using twenty typical electrode configurations. Two different current flow-modeling tools were used to compare the results and determine possible differences between both procedures regarding the specificity, as well as the reliability of the estimates. The results were rather consistent between both simulations. Some modest differences of the simulated distribution and intensity of the electric fields between the results of the respective modeling approaches were identified, which might have functional significance and reveal the need to empirically validate these models. The non-availability of quantitative data about the precise electric field distribution beyond the cortical target is a common limitation of both methods, which limits the determination of the spatial specificity of the intervention. These findings help to define future directions of research that allow to exploit the full potential of standard simulation approaches in the field of non-invasive brain stimulation. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation procedure to modulate cortical excitability and related brain functions. tDCS can effectively alter multiple brain functions in healthy humans and is suggested as a therapeutic tool in several neurological and psychiatric diseases. However, variability of results is an important limitation of this method. This variability may be due to multiple factors, including age, head and brain anatomy (including skull, skin, CSF and meninges), cognitive reserve and baseline performance level, specific task demands, as well as comorbidities in clinical settings. Different electrode montages are a further source of variability between tDCS studies. A procedure to estimate the electric field generated by specific tDCS electrode configurations, which can be helpful to adapt stimulation protocols, is the computational finite element method. This approach is useful to provide a priori modeling of the current spread and electric field intensity that will be generated according to the implemented electrode montage. Here, we present standard, non-personalized model-based electric field simulations for motor, dorsolateral prefrontal, and posterior parietal cortex stimulation according to twenty typical tDCS electrode configurations using two different current flow modeling software packages. The resulting simulated maximum intensity of the electric field, focality, and current spread were similar, but not identical, between models.The advantages and limitations of both mathematical simulations of the electric field are presented and discussed systematically, including aspects that, at present, prevent more widespread application of respective simulation approaches in the field of non-invasive brain stimulation.
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/biology10121230
dc.identifier.essn2079-7737
dc.identifier.pmid34943145
dc.identifier.unpaywallURLhttps://www.mdpi.com/2079-7737/10/12/1230/pdf?version=1637836094
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10668/25063
dc.identifier.wosID736266600001
dc.issue.number12
dc.journal.titleBiology-basel
dc.journal.titleabbreviationBiology-basel
dc.language.isoen
dc.organizationSAS - Hospital Universitario de Jerez de la Frontera
dc.publisherMdpi
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 International
dc.rights.accessRightsopen access
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subjectcurrent flow
dc.subjectcurrent intensity
dc.subjectelectric field
dc.subjectfinite element method
dc.subjecttDCS
dc.subjectDirect-current stimulation
dc.subjectDorsolateral prefrontal cortex
dc.subjectMotor cortex
dc.subjectExcitability
dc.subjectVariability
dc.subjectHealthy
dc.subjectDeterminants
dc.subjectFacilitation
dc.subjectOrientation
dc.subjectThreshold
dc.titleStandard Non-Personalized Electric Field Modeling of Twenty Typical tDCS Electrode Configurations via the Computational Finite Element Method: Contributions and Limitations of Two Different Approaches
dc.typeresearch article
dc.type.hasVersionVoR
dc.volume.number10
dc.wostypeArticle

Files