ArticleThe Journal of international medical research2021
Transcranial direct current stimulation in patients after decompressive craniectomy: a finite element model to investigate factors affecting the cortical electric field.
Article in The Journal of international medical research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimized high-definition tDCS in patients with skull defects and skull plates.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2023Article
- Electric Fields Induced in the Brain by Transcranial Electric Stimulation: A Review of In Vivo Recordings.Biomedicines · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo simulate the process of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on patients after decompressive craniectomy (DC), and to model cortical electric field distributions under different electrode montages, we constructed a finite element model that represented the human head at high resolution.
methodsUsing computed tomography images, we constructed a human head model with high geometrical similarity. The removed bone flap was simplified to be circular with a diameter of 12 cm. We then constructed finite element models according to bioelectrical parameters. Finally, we simulated tDCS on the finite element models under different electrode montages.
resultsInward current had a linear relationship with peak electric field value, but almost no effect on electric field distribution. If the anode was not over the skull hole (configuration 2), there was almost no difference in electric field magnitude and focality between the circular and square electrodes. However, if the anode was right over the hole (configuration 1), the circular electrodes led to higher peak electric field values and worse focality. In addition, configuration 1 significantly decreased focality compared with configuration 2.
conclusionOur results might serve as guidelines for selecting current and electrode montage settings when performing tDCS on patients after DC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.