Biological Systems Modeling
Mohsen Kamelian Rad; Mohammad Ali Ahmadi Pajouh; Mehrdad Saviz
Volume 15, Issue 2 , August 2021, , Pages 175-186
Abstract
Transcutaneous electrical stimulation of peripheral nerve fibers has always been an important field of research. Many studies indicate the possibility to block the conduction of nerve fibers by using high frequency alternating currents (HFAC). According to the fact that the stimulation of narrower fibers ...
Read More
Transcutaneous electrical stimulation of peripheral nerve fibers has always been an important field of research. Many studies indicate the possibility to block the conduction of nerve fibers by using high frequency alternating currents (HFAC). According to the fact that the stimulation of narrower fibers is always accompanied by activation of thicker fibers, in this study, current regions for selective stimulation of different nerve fibers without activating other fibers have been obtained. This success is achieved through the nerve conduction block using HFAC (5-20 KHz). Stimulation current regions is a part of the intensity-frequency diagram which by choosing the excitation parameters in this area, only some target fibers are stimulated according to their diameters. The McIntyre nerve fiber model was used to perform these simulations; The sodium-potassium pump model has also been added to it and its effects have been investigated. A unipolar electrode is considered which acts as a point current source at different distances from the nerve fibers, and selective excitation spaces are obtained for the Aδ and Aβ fibers. The appropriate frequency range for excitation of different fibers is 5 kHz and above, while the desired current for selective excitation of Aδ and Aβ fibers is given by two polynomial equations of order 2 and 3, respectively, which are fitted to the middle of selective parameter space of each nerve fiber. Also, the excitation current varies from about 0.8 to 1.8 mA for Aδ fibers and from about 0.55 to 0.95 mA for Aβ fibers. In all of the simulations mentioned in this article, the sinusoidal waveform is used.
Neural Engineering / Neuroengineering / Brain Engineering
Ghazaleh Soleimani; Mehrdad Saviz; Farzad Towhidkhah; Hamed Ekhtiari
Volume 14, Issue 3 , October 2020, , Pages 251-266
Abstract
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is the most-used non-invasive brain stimulation method. However, the main challenge in tDCS studies is its heterogeneity and large inter-individual variability in response. Brain anatomy, that varies from person to person, can change electric field distribution ...
Read More
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is the most-used non-invasive brain stimulation method. However, the main challenge in tDCS studies is its heterogeneity and large inter-individual variability in response. Brain anatomy, that varies from person to person, can change electric field distribution patterns in the brain and should be considered as a source of variation. Previous findings support that tDCS-induced EFs affect brain activity and ultimately change behavioral outcomes. Nonetheless, the exact relationship between EFs and brain activity alterations has not yet been investigated. In this randomized double-blinded sham-controlled crossover study, 14 subjects with methamphetamine use disorders were recruited and tDCS with 2 mA current intensity was applied over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Each subject participated in two sessions for sham or real stimulation with at least a 1-week washout period. In each session, structural and functional MRI during a cue-induced craving task were collected immediately before and after tDCS. Individualized computational head models were simulated based on structural MR images and finite element methods. Group-level analysis of the models showed inter-individual variability across the subjects with maximum electric field intensity in frontal pole (0.3424±0.07). Furthermore, functional data, based on a drug minus neutral contrast, showed that real versus sham stimulation decreased brain activity in superior temporal gyrus and posterior cingulate cortex (P<0.001). However, we did not find a significant correlation between induced EFs and brain activity alterations. In sum, in this study, we suggested a pipeline for integrating electric fields with functional neuroimaging data to bring new insights into the tDCS mechanism of action and future studies are required to establish, or to refute, this conclusion.
