Investigating the technical feasibility of magnetoencephalography during transcranial direct current stimulation

被引:1
|
作者
Shirota, Yuichiro [1 ]
Fushimi, Motofumi [2 ]
Sekino, Masaki [2 ]
Yumoto, Masato [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Tokyo Hosp, Dept Clin Lab, Tokyo, Japan
[2] Univ Tokyo, Grad Sch Engn, Dept Bioengn, Tokyo, Japan
[3] Gunma Paz Univ, Dept Clin Engn, Takasaki, Japan
来源
关键词
MEG; tDCS; artifact rejection; magnetoencephalography; Maxwell filter; source modeling; transcranial direct current stimulation; MOTOR CORTEX;
D O I
10.3389/fnhum.2023.1270605
中图分类号
Q189 [神经科学];
学科分类号
071006 ;
摘要
IntroductionMagnetoencephalography (MEG) can measure weak magnetic fields produced by electrical brain activity. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can affect such brain activities. The concurrent application of both, however, is challenging because tDCS presents artifacts on the MEG signal. If brain activity during tDCS can be elucidated by MEG, mechanisms of plasticity-inducing and other effects of tDCS would be more comprehensively understood. We tested the technical feasibility of MEG during tDCS using a phantom that produces an artificial current dipole simulating focal brain activity. An earlier study investigated estimation of a single oscillating phantom dipole during tDCS, and we systematically tested multiple dipole locations with a different MEG device.MethodsA phantom provided by the manufacturer was used to produce current dipoles from 32 locations. For the 32 dipoles, MEG was recorded with and without tDCS. Temporally extended signal space separation (tSSS) was applied for artifact rejection. Current dipole sources were estimated as equivalent current dipoles (ECDs). The ECD modeling quality was assessed using localization error, amplitude error, and goodness of fit (GOF). The ECD modeling performance with and without tDCS, and with and without tSSS was assessed.ResultsMean localization errors of the 32 dipoles were 1.70 & PLUSMN; 0.72 mm (tDCS off, tSSS off, mean & PLUSMN; standard deviation), 6.13 & PLUSMN; 3.32 mm (tDCS on, tSSS off), 1.78 & PLUSMN; 0.83 mm (tDCS off, tSSS on), and 5.73 & PLUSMN; 1.60 mm (tDCS on, tSSS on). Mean GOF findings were, respectively, 92.3, 87.4, 97.5, and 96.7%. Modeling was affected by tDCS and restored by tSSS, but improvement of the localization error was marginal, even with tSSS. Also, the quality was dependent on the dipole location.DiscussionConcurrent tDCS-MEG recording is feasible, especially when tSSS is applied for artifact rejection and when the assumed location of the source of activity is favorable for modeling. More technical studies must be conducted to confirm its feasibility with different source modeling methods and stimulation protocols. Recovery of single-trial activity under tDCS warrants further research.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Feasibility of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Use in Children Aged 5 to 12 Years
    Andrade, Agnes Carvalho
    Magnavita, Guilherme Moreira
    Brasil Nunes Allegro, Juleilda Valeria
    Borges Passos Neto, Carlos Eduardo
    Saldanha Lucena, Rita de Cassia
    Fregni, Felipe
    JOURNAL OF CHILD NEUROLOGY, 2014, 29 (10) : 1360 - 1365
  • [42] Neural mechanisms underlying perilesional transcranial direct current stimulation in aphasia: a feasibility study
    Ulm, Lena
    McMahon, Katie
    Copland, David
    de Zubicaray, Greig I.
    Meinzer, Marcus
    FRONTIERS IN HUMAN NEUROSCIENCE, 2015, 9
  • [43] Transcranial direct current stimulation: before, during, or after motor training?
    Cabral, Maria E.
    Baltar, Adriana
    Borba, Rebeka
    Galvao, Silvana
    Santos, Luciana
    Fregni, Felipe
    Monte-Silva, Katia
    NEUROREPORT, 2015, 26 (11) : 618 - 622
  • [44] Safety and feasibility of transcranial direct current stimulation stratified by corticospinal organization in children with hemiparesis
    Nemanich, Samuel T.
    Lench, Daniel H.
    Sutter, Ellen N.
    Kowalski, Jesse L.
    Francis, Sunday M.
    Meekins, Gregg D.
    Krach, Linda E.
    Feyma, Tim
    Gillick, Bernadette T.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PAEDIATRIC NEUROLOGY, 2023, 43 : 27 - 35
  • [45] Remotely supervised transcranial direct current stimulation: A feasibility study for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis
    Sivaramakrishnan, Anjali
    Datta, Abhishek
    Bikson, Marom
    Madhavan, Sangeetha
    NEUROREHABILITATION, 2019, 45 (03) : 369 - 378
  • [46] Hypomanic episode in unipolar depression during transcranial direct current stimulation
    Baccaro, Alessandra
    Brunoni, Andre Russowsky
    Bensenor, Isabela Martins
    Fregni, Felipe
    ACTA NEUROPSYCHIATRICA, 2010, 22 (06): : 316 - 318
  • [47] Minimal Heating at the Skin Surface During Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation
    Khadka, Niranjan
    Zannou, Adantchede L.
    Zunara, Fatima
    Truong, Dennis Q.
    Dmochowski, Jacek
    Bikson, Marom
    NEUROMODULATION, 2018, 21 (04): : 334 - 339
  • [48] Transcranial direct current stimulation during sleep improves declarative memory
    Marshall, L
    Mölle, M
    Hallschmid, M
    Born, J
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE, 2004, 24 (44): : 9985 - 9992
  • [49] Noninvasive brain stimulation: repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and transcranial direct current stimulation
    Kim, Yun-Hee
    JOURNAL OF THE KOREAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2013, 56 (01): : 30 - 37
  • [50] Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Across Mental Disorders
    Sabe, Michel
    Hyde, Joshua
    Cramer, Catharina
    Eberhard, Antonia
    Crippa, Alessio
    Brunoni, Andre Russowsky
    Aleman, Andre
    Kaiser, Stefan
    Baldwin, David S.
    Garner, Matthew
    Sentissi, Othman
    Fiedorowicz, Jess G.
    Brandt, Valerie
    Cortese, Samuele
    Solmi, Marco
    JAMA NETWORK OPEN, 2024, 7 (05)