Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32040791›Full record

ArticleNeurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology2020

Impact of brain atrophy on tDCS and HD-tDCS current flow: a modeling study in three variants of primary progressive aphasia.

Gozde Unal, Bronte Ficek, Kimberly Webster, Syed Shahabuddin, Dennis Truong, Benjamin Hampstead, Marom Bikson, Kyrana Tsapkini

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. The 2020 Yearbook of Neurorestoratology.Journal of neurorestoratology · 2021
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Gozde UnalDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, The City College of New York, New York, NY, 10031, USA.
Bronte FicekDepartment of Neurology, Cerebrovascular Division, Johns Hopkins Medicine, 600 N. Wolfe Street, Phipps 488, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA.
Kimberly WebsterDepartment of Neurology, Cerebrovascular Division, Johns Hopkins Medicine, 600 N. Wolfe Street, Phipps 488, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA.
Syed ShahabuddinDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, The City College of New York, New York, NY, 10031, USA.
Dennis TruongDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, The City College of New York, New York, NY, 10031, USA.
Benjamin HampsteadDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA.
Marom BiksonDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, The City College of New York, New York, NY, 10031, USA.
Kyrana TsapkiniDepartment of Neurology, Cerebrovascular Division, Johns Hopkins Medicine, 600 N. Wolfe Street, Phipps 488, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA. tsapkini@jhmi.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6020-5532
City College of New York · USJohns Hopkins University · USUniversity of Michigan · US

Funding

Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation in spoken and written production in primary progressive aphasiaR01DC014475 · NIDCD · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI TSAPKINI, KYRANA · 2015 to 2019
$4.1M
A tool-box to control and enhance tDCS spatial precisionR01MH111896 · NIMH · CITY COLLEGE OF NEW YORK · PI BIKSON, MAROM · 2016 to 2019
$2.2M
The coupled vascular hypothesis for transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)R01NS101362 · NINDS · CITY COLLEGE OF NEW YORK · PI BIKSON, MAROM · 2017 to 2021
$1.7M
NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC014475NIMH NIH HHS NIH-NIMH 1R01MH111896NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH111896NINDS NIH HHS NIH-NINDS 1R01NS101362NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS101362
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuring transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), the amount and distribution of current that reaches the brain depends on individual anatomy. Many progressive neurodegenerative diseases are associated with cortical atrophy, but the importance of individual brain atrophy during tDCS in patients with progressive atrophy, including primary progressive aphasia (PPA), remains unclear.

objectiveIn the present study, we addressed the question whether brain anatomy in patients with distinct cortical atrophy patterns would impact brain current intensity and distribution during tDCS over the left IFG.

methodWe developed state-of-the-art, gyri-precise models of three subjects, each representing a variant of primary progressive aphasia: non-fluent variant PPA (nfvPPA), semantic variant PPA (svPPA), and logopenic variant PPA (lvPPA). We considered two exemplary montages over the left inferior frontal gyrus (IFG): a conventional pad montage (anode over F7, cathode over the right cheek) and a 4 × 1 high-definition tDCS montage. We further considered whether local anatomical features, specifically distance of the cortex to skull, can directly predict local electric field intensity.

resultsWe found that the differences in brain current flow across the three PPA variants fall within the distribution of anatomically typical adults. While clustering of electric fields was often around individual gyri or sulci, the minimal distance from the gyri/sulci to skull was not correlated with electric field intensity.

conclusionLimited to the conditions and assumptions considered here, this argues against a specific need to adjust the tDCS montage for these patients any more than might be considered useful in anatomically typical adults. Therefore, local atrophy does not, in isolation, reliably predict local electric field. Rather, our results are consistent with holistic head anatomy influencing brain current flow, with tDCS producing diffuse and individualized brain current flow patterns and HD-tDCS producing targeted brain current flow across individuals.

Indexed as

Aphasia, Primary ProgressiveNeurodegenerative DiseasesTranscranial Direct Current StimulationAdultAtrophyBrainHumansAtrophyConventional tDCSElectrical current flowHD-tDCSModelingPrimary progressive aphasia

Identifiers

PMID32040791
PMCPMC7363529
OpenAlexW3005825169

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.