Can Individually Targeted and Optimized Multi-channel TDCS Outperform Standard Bipolar TDCS in Stimulating the Primary Somatosensory Cortex?
Overview
Authors
Affiliations
Background: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has emerged as a non-invasive neuro-modulation technique. Most studies show that anodal tDCS increases cortical excitability, however, with variable outcomes. Previously, we have shown in computer simulations that our multi-channel tDCS (mc-tDCS) approach, the distributed constrained maximum intensity (D-CMI) method can potentially lead to better controlled tDCS results due to the improved directionality of the injected current at the target side for individually optimized D-CMI montages.
Objective: In this study, we test the application of the D-CMI approach in an experimental study to stimulate the somatosensory P20/N20 target source in Brodmann area 3b and compare it with standard bipolar tDCS and sham conditions.
Methods: We applied anodal D-CMI, the standard bipolar and D-CMI based Sham tDCS for 10 min to target the 20 ms post-stimulus somatosensory P20/N20 target brain source in Brodmann area 3b reconstructed using combined magnetoencephalography (MEG) and electroencephalography (EEG) source analysis in realistic head models with calibrated skull conductivity in a group-study with 13 subjects. Finger-stimulated somatosensory evoked fields (SEF) were recorded and the component at 20 ms post-stimulus (M20) was analyzed before and after the application of the three tDCS conditions in order to read out the stimulation effect on Brodmann area 3b.
Results: Analysis of the finger stimulated SEF M20 peak before (baseline) and after tDCS shows a significant increase in source amplitude in Brodmann area 3b for D-CMI (6-16 min after tDCS), while no significant effects are found for standard bipolar (6-16 min after tDCS) and sham (6-16 min after tDCS) stimulation conditions. For the later time courses (16-26 and 27-37 min post-stimulation), we found a significant decrease in M20 peak source amplitude for standard bipolar and sham tDCS, while there was no effect for D-CMI.
Conclusion: Our results indicate that targeted and optimized, and thereby highly individualized, mc-tDCS can outperform standard bipolar stimulation and lead to better control over stimulation outcomes with, however, a considerable amount of additional work compared to standard bipolar tDCS.
Haihambo N, Li M, Ma Q, Baeken C, Deroost N, Baetens K Int J Clin Health Psychol. 2024; 24(3):100480.
PMID: 39055855 PMC: 11269293. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijchp.2024.100480.
Comparing the performance of beamformer algorithms in estimating orientations of neural sources.
Buschermohle Y, Holtershinken M, Erdbrugger T, Radecke J, Sprenger A, Schneider T iScience. 2024; 27(3):109150.
PMID: 38420593 PMC: 10901088. DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2024.109150.
Radecke J, Sprenger A, Stockler H, Espeter L, Reichhardt M, Thomann L Sci Rep. 2023; 13(1):21380.
PMID: 38049419 PMC: 10695990. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-48313-z.
Machine-learning defined precision tDCS for improving cognitive function.
Albizu A, Indahlastari A, Huang Z, Waner J, Stolte S, Fang R Brain Stimul. 2023; 16(3):969-974.
PMID: 37279860 PMC: 11080612. DOI: 10.1016/j.brs.2023.05.020.