Abstract
Background In many clinical trials involving transcranial electrical stimulation (tES), target electrodes are typically placed over DLPFC with the assumption that this will primarily stimulate the underlying brain region. However, our study aimed to evaluate the electric fields (EF) that are actually delivered and identify prefrontal regions that may be inadvertently targeted in DLPFC tES.
Methods Head models were generated from Human Connectome Project database’s T1+T2-weighted MRIs of 80 healthy adults. Two common DLPFC montages were simulated; symmetric-F4/F3, and asymmetric-F4/Fp1. Averaged EF was extracted from (1) the center of target electrode (F4), and (2) the top 1% of voxels showing the strongest EF in individualized EF maps. Inter-individual variabilities were quantified with standard deviation of EF peak location/value. Similar steps were repeated with 66 participants with methamphetamine use disorder (MUDs) as an independent clinical population.
Results In healthy adults, the group-level location of EF peaks was situated in the medial-frontopolar, and the individualized EF peaks were positioned in a cube with a volume of 29cm3/46cm3 (symmetric/asymmetric montages). EFs in frontopolar area were significantly higher than EF “under” the target electrode in both symmetric (peak:0.41±0.06, F4:0.22±0.04) and asymmetric (peak:0.38±0.04, F4:0.2±0.04) montages (Heges’g>0.7). Similar results with slight between-group differences were found in MUDs.
Conclusions We highlighted that in common DLPFC tES montages, in addition to inter-individual/inter-group variability, the frontopolar received the highest EFs rather than DLPFC as the main target. We specifically recommended considering the potential involvement of the frontopolar area as a mechanism underlying the effectiveness of DLPFC tES protocols.
Highlights
There are many published tES studies assuming targeting DLPFC with DLPFC tES montages
In DLPFC tES montages, electric field peaks are not located under the electrodes
The electric field peak in DLPFC montages is located in the medial frontopolar area
An independent population showed between-group similarities and variations in electric field
There is a large interindividual variation in both location and strength of the electric field peak
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
T1 and T2 weighted MR images of 100 healthy subjects obtained from the publically available Human connectome project database, http://www.humanconnectomeproject.org/data/) with deidentified anatomical scans were used. For the independent clinical population, the study was approved by the Western IRB (WIRB Protocol #20171742) (all subjects were recruited during their early abstinence from the 12&12 residential drug addiction treatment center in Tulsa, Oklahoma in the process of a clinical trial to measure the efficacy of tDCS on methamphetamine craving (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03382379)).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
The coherence of certain sections in the manuscript has been improved through updates.
Data Availability
The raw database and head models generated for this study are available on request to the corresponding author.
