Projected current density comparison in tDCS block and smooth FE modeling

Aprinda Indahlastari, Munish Chauhan, Rosalind Sadleir

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Current density distribution and projected current density calculation following transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) forward model in a human head were compared between two modeling pipelines: block and smooth. Block model was directly constructed from MRI voxel resolution and simulated in C. Smooth models underwent a boundary smoothing process by applying recursive Gaussian filters and simulated in COMSOL. Three smoothing levels were added to determine their effects on current density distribution compared to block models. Median current density percentage differences were calculated in anterior superior temporal gyrus (ASTG), hippocampus (HIP), inferior frontal gyrus (IFG), occipital lobes (OCC) and precentral gyrus (PRC) and normalized against a baseline value. A maximum of + 20% difference in median current density was found for three standard electrode montages: F3-RS, T7-T8 and Cz-Oz. Furthermore, median current density percentage differences in each montage target brain structures were found to be within + 7%. Higher levels of smoothing increased median current density percentage differences in T7-T8 and Cz-Oz target structures. However, while demonstrating similar trends in each montage, additional smoothing levels showed no clear relationship between their smoothing effects and calculated median current density in the five cortical structures. Finally, relative L2 error in reconstructed projected current density was found to be 17% and 21% for block and smooth pipelines, respectively. Overall, a block model workflow may be a more attractive alternative for simulating tDCS stimulation because involves a shorter modeling time and independence from commercial modeling platforms.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publication2016 38th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, EMBC 2016
PublisherInstitute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.
Pages4079-4082
Number of pages4
Volume2016-October
ISBN (Electronic)9781457702204
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 13 2016
Event38th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, EMBC 2016 - Orlando, United States
Duration: Aug 16 2016Aug 20 2016

Other

Other38th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, EMBC 2016
CountryUnited States
CityOrlando
Period8/16/168/20/16

Fingerprint

Occipital Lobe
Current density
Parahippocampal Gyrus
Workflow
Frontal Lobe
Temporal Lobe
Prefrontal Cortex
Electrodes
Head
Brain
Pipelines
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation
Magnetic resonance imaging

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Signal Processing
  • Biomedical Engineering
  • Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition
  • Health Informatics

Cite this

Indahlastari, A., Chauhan, M., & Sadleir, R. (2016). Projected current density comparison in tDCS block and smooth FE modeling. In 2016 38th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, EMBC 2016 (Vol. 2016-October, pp. 4079-4082). [7591623] Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.. https://doi.org/10.1109/EMBC.2016.7591623

Projected current density comparison in tDCS block and smooth FE modeling. / Indahlastari, Aprinda; Chauhan, Munish; Sadleir, Rosalind.

2016 38th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, EMBC 2016. Vol. 2016-October Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., 2016. p. 4079-4082 7591623.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

Indahlastari, A, Chauhan, M & Sadleir, R 2016, Projected current density comparison in tDCS block and smooth FE modeling. in 2016 38th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, EMBC 2016. vol. 2016-October, 7591623, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., pp. 4079-4082, 38th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, EMBC 2016, Orlando, United States, 8/16/16. https://doi.org/10.1109/EMBC.2016.7591623
Indahlastari A, Chauhan M, Sadleir R. Projected current density comparison in tDCS block and smooth FE modeling. In 2016 38th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, EMBC 2016. Vol. 2016-October. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc. 2016. p. 4079-4082. 7591623 https://doi.org/10.1109/EMBC.2016.7591623
Indahlastari, Aprinda ; Chauhan, Munish ; Sadleir, Rosalind. / Projected current density comparison in tDCS block and smooth FE modeling. 2016 38th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, EMBC 2016. Vol. 2016-October Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., 2016. pp. 4079-4082
@inproceedings{47d415881e924a02a48dd63558b016c8,
title = "Projected current density comparison in tDCS block and smooth FE modeling",
abstract = "Current density distribution and projected current density calculation following transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) forward model in a human head were compared between two modeling pipelines: block and smooth. Block model was directly constructed from MRI voxel resolution and simulated in C. Smooth models underwent a boundary smoothing process by applying recursive Gaussian filters and simulated in COMSOL. Three smoothing levels were added to determine their effects on current density distribution compared to block models. Median current density percentage differences were calculated in anterior superior temporal gyrus (ASTG), hippocampus (HIP), inferior frontal gyrus (IFG), occipital lobes (OCC) and precentral gyrus (PRC) and normalized against a baseline value. A maximum of + 20{\%} difference in median current density was found for three standard electrode montages: F3-RS, T7-T8 and Cz-Oz. Furthermore, median current density percentage differences in each montage target brain structures were found to be within + 7{\%}. Higher levels of smoothing increased median current density percentage differences in T7-T8 and Cz-Oz target structures. However, while demonstrating similar trends in each montage, additional smoothing levels showed no clear relationship between their smoothing effects and calculated median current density in the five cortical structures. Finally, relative L2 error in reconstructed projected current density was found to be 17{\%} and 21{\%} for block and smooth pipelines, respectively. Overall, a block model workflow may be a more attractive alternative for simulating tDCS stimulation because involves a shorter modeling time and independence from commercial modeling platforms.",
author = "Aprinda Indahlastari and Munish Chauhan and Rosalind Sadleir",
year = "2016",
month = "10",
day = "13",
doi = "10.1109/EMBC.2016.7591623",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "2016-October",
pages = "4079--4082",
booktitle = "2016 38th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, EMBC 2016",
publisher = "Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.",
address = "United States",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - Projected current density comparison in tDCS block and smooth FE modeling

AU - Indahlastari, Aprinda

AU - Chauhan, Munish

AU - Sadleir, Rosalind

PY - 2016/10/13

Y1 - 2016/10/13

N2 - Current density distribution and projected current density calculation following transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) forward model in a human head were compared between two modeling pipelines: block and smooth. Block model was directly constructed from MRI voxel resolution and simulated in C. Smooth models underwent a boundary smoothing process by applying recursive Gaussian filters and simulated in COMSOL. Three smoothing levels were added to determine their effects on current density distribution compared to block models. Median current density percentage differences were calculated in anterior superior temporal gyrus (ASTG), hippocampus (HIP), inferior frontal gyrus (IFG), occipital lobes (OCC) and precentral gyrus (PRC) and normalized against a baseline value. A maximum of + 20% difference in median current density was found for three standard electrode montages: F3-RS, T7-T8 and Cz-Oz. Furthermore, median current density percentage differences in each montage target brain structures were found to be within + 7%. Higher levels of smoothing increased median current density percentage differences in T7-T8 and Cz-Oz target structures. However, while demonstrating similar trends in each montage, additional smoothing levels showed no clear relationship between their smoothing effects and calculated median current density in the five cortical structures. Finally, relative L2 error in reconstructed projected current density was found to be 17% and 21% for block and smooth pipelines, respectively. Overall, a block model workflow may be a more attractive alternative for simulating tDCS stimulation because involves a shorter modeling time and independence from commercial modeling platforms.

AB - Current density distribution and projected current density calculation following transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) forward model in a human head were compared between two modeling pipelines: block and smooth. Block model was directly constructed from MRI voxel resolution and simulated in C. Smooth models underwent a boundary smoothing process by applying recursive Gaussian filters and simulated in COMSOL. Three smoothing levels were added to determine their effects on current density distribution compared to block models. Median current density percentage differences were calculated in anterior superior temporal gyrus (ASTG), hippocampus (HIP), inferior frontal gyrus (IFG), occipital lobes (OCC) and precentral gyrus (PRC) and normalized against a baseline value. A maximum of + 20% difference in median current density was found for three standard electrode montages: F3-RS, T7-T8 and Cz-Oz. Furthermore, median current density percentage differences in each montage target brain structures were found to be within + 7%. Higher levels of smoothing increased median current density percentage differences in T7-T8 and Cz-Oz target structures. However, while demonstrating similar trends in each montage, additional smoothing levels showed no clear relationship between their smoothing effects and calculated median current density in the five cortical structures. Finally, relative L2 error in reconstructed projected current density was found to be 17% and 21% for block and smooth pipelines, respectively. Overall, a block model workflow may be a more attractive alternative for simulating tDCS stimulation because involves a shorter modeling time and independence from commercial modeling platforms.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85009110263&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85009110263&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1109/EMBC.2016.7591623

DO - 10.1109/EMBC.2016.7591623

M3 - Conference contribution

C2 - 28269179

AN - SCOPUS:85009110263

VL - 2016-October

SP - 4079

EP - 4082

BT - 2016 38th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, EMBC 2016

PB - Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.

ER -