AUTHOR=Guillen Alexander , Truong Dennis Q. , Datta Abhishek , Huang Yu TITLE=Optimized high-definition tDCS in patients with skull defects and skull plates JOURNAL=Frontiers in Human Neuroscience VOLUME=17 YEAR=2023 URL=https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/human-neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnhum.2023.1239105 DOI=10.3389/fnhum.2023.1239105 ISSN=1662-5161 ABSTRACT=Introduction

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been shown to benefit patients with brain lesions or traumatic brain injury (TBI). These patients usually have skull defects with different sizes and electrical conductivities. There is very little data in the literature that show how to optimally stimulate these patients with the presence of skull defects.

Methods

Here we leveraged high-resolution (1 mm) realistic head models to explore the best montages targeting right beneath the skull defects with different sizes and conductivities. Specifically, open-source software ROAST was used to solve for the lead field on the publicly available MIDA model. Four different skull defects/plates were modeled with the center above the right primary motor cortex: a larger defect (10 cm diameter) modeled as either titanium or acrylic plate, and a smaller defect (2.5 cm diameter) modeled as either acute state filled with cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) or chronic state with scar tissue. Optimized stimulation with maximal intensity was run using ROAST targeting the right primary motor cortex.

Results

We show that optimized high-definition montages can achieve an average of 0.3 V/m higher stimulation intensities at the target compared to un-optimized montages (M1-SO or 4×1). Large skull defects with titanium or acrylic plates significantly reduce the stimulation intensity by about 80%, while small defects with acute (CSF) or chronic (scar) tissues significantly increase the stimulation intensity by about 200%. Furthermore, one can use M1-SO to achieve almost the same stimulation strength as the optimized montage if the skull has a large defect with titanium plate, and there is no significant difference in stimulation intensity between 4×1 montage and the optimized montage for small skull defects with scar tissue.

Discussion

Based on this work, future modeling studies leveraging individual anatomy of skull defects may help guide tDCS practice on patients with skull defects and skull plates.