The impact of brain lesions on tDCS-induced electric fields.

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can enhance motor and language rehabilitation after stroke. Though brain lesions distort tDCS-induced electric field (E-field), systematic accounts remain limited. Using electric field modelling, we investigated the effect of 630 synthetic lesions on E-field magnitude in the region of interest (ROI). Models were conducted for two tDCS montages targeting either primary motor cortex (M1) or Broca's area (BA44). Absolute E-field magnitude in the ROI differed by up to 42% compared to the non-lesioned brain depending on lesion size, lesion-ROI distance, and lesion conductivity value. Lesion location determined the sign of this difference: lesions in-line with the predominant direction of current increased E-field magnitude in the ROI, whereas lesions located in the opposite direction decreased E-field magnitude. We further explored how individualised tDCS can control lesion-induced effects on E-field. Lesions affected the individualised electrode configuration needed to maximise E-field magnitude in the ROI, but this effect was negligible when prioritising the maximisation of radial inward current. Lesions distorting tDCS-induced E-field, is likely to exacerbate inter-individual variability in E-field magnitude. Individualising electrode configuration and stimulator output can minimise lesion-induced variability but requires improved estimates of lesion conductivity. Individualised tDCS is critical to overcome E-field variability in lesioned brains.

Inter-individual variability in current direction for common tDCS montages.

The direction of applied electric current relative to the cortical surface is a key determinant of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) effects. Inter-individual differences in anatomy affect the consistency of current direction at a cortical target. However, the degree of this variability remains undetermined. Using current flow modelling (CFM), we quantified the inter-individual variability in tDCS current direction at a cortical target (left primary motor cortex, M1). Three montages targeting M1 using circular electrodes were compared: PA-tDCS directed current perpendicular to the central sulcus in a posterior-anterior direction relative to M1, ML-tDCS directed current parallel to the central sulcus in a medio-lateral direction, and conventional-tDCS applied electrodes over M1 and the contralateral forehead. In 50 healthy brain scans from the Human Connectome Project, we extracted current direction and intensity from the grey matter surface in the sulcal bank (M1BANK) and gyral crown (M1CROWN), and neighbouring primary somatosensory cortex (S1BANK and S1CROWN). Results confirmed substantial inter-individual variability in current direction (50%-150%) across all montages. Radial inward current produced by PA-tDCS was predominantly located in M1BANK, whereas for conventional-tDCS it was clustered in M1CROWN. The difference in radial inward current in functionally distinct subregions of M1 raises the testable hypothesis that PA-tDCS and conventional-tDCS modulate cortical excitability through different mechanisms. We show that electrode locations can be used to closely approximate current direction in M1 and precentral gyrus, providing a landmark-based method for tDCS application to address the hypothesis without the need for MRI. By contrast, ML-tDCS current was more tangentially orientated, which is associated with weaker somatic polarisation. Substantial inter-individual variability in current direction likely contributes to variable neuromodulation effects reported for these protocols, emphasising the need for individualised electrode montages, including the control of current direction.

Dose-controlled tDCS reduces electric field intensity variability at a cortical target site.

BACKGROUND: Variable effects limit the efficacy of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) as a research and therapeutic tool. Conventional application of a fixed-dose of tDCS does not account for inter-individual differences in anatomy (e.g. skull thickness), which varies the amount of current reaching the brain. Individualised dose-control may reduce the variable effects of tDCS by reducing variability in electric field (E-field) intensities at a cortical target site. OBJECTIVE: To characterise the variability in E-field intensity at a cortical site (left primary motor cortex; M1) and throughout the brain for conventional fixed-dose tDCS, and individualised dose-controlled tDCS. METHODS: The intensity and distribution of the E-field during tDCS was estimated using Realistic Volumetric Approach to Simulate Transcranial Electric Stimulation (ROAST) in 50 individual brain scans taken from the Human Connectome Project, for fixed-dose tDCS (1 mA & 2 mA) and individualised dose-controlled tDCS targeting left M1. RESULTS: With a fixed-dose (1 mA & 2 mA), E-field intensity in left M1 varied by more than 100% across individuals, with substantial variation observed throughout the brain as well. Individualised dose-control ensured the same E-field intensity was delivered to left M1 in all individuals. Its variance in other regions of interest (right M1 and area underneath the electrodes) was comparable with fixed- and individualised-dose. CONCLUSIONS: Individualised dose-control can eliminate the variance in E-field intensities at a cortical target site. Assuming that the current delivered to the brain directly determines its physiological and behavioural consequences, this approach may allow for reducing the known variability of tDCS effects.