Brain Stimulation (Mar 2022)
How structural and functional MRI can inform dual-site tACS parameters: A case study in a clinical population and its pragmatic implications
Abstract
Background: Abnormalities in frontoparietal network (FPN) were observed in many neuropsychiatric diseases including substance use disorders. A growing number of studies are using dual-site-tACS with frontoparietal synchronization to engage this network. However, a computational pathway to inform and optimize parameter space for frontoparietal synchronization is still lacking. In this case study, in a group of participants with methamphetamine use disorders, we proposed a computational pathway to extract optimal electrode montage while accounting for stimulation intensity using structural and functional MRI. Methods: Sixty methamphetamine users completed an fMRI drug cue-reactivity task. Four main steps were taken to define electrode montage and adjust stimulation intensity using 4x1 high-definition (HD) electrodes for a dual-site-tACS; (1) Frontal seed was defined based on the maximum electric fields (EF) predicted by simulation of HD montage over DLPFC (F3/F4 in EEG 10–10), (2) frontal seed-to-whole brain context-dependent correlation was calculated to determine connected regions to frontal seeds, (3) center of connected cluster in parietal cortex was selected as a location for placing the second set of HD electrodes to shape the informed montage, (4) individualized head models were used to determine optimal stimulation intensity considering underlying brain structure. The informed montage was compared to montages with large electrodes and classic frontoparietal HD montages (F3-P3/F4-P4) in terms of tACS-induced EF and ROI-to-ROI task-based/resting-state connectivity. Results: Compared to the large electrodes, HD frontoparietal montages allow for a finer control of the spatial peak fields in the main nodes of the FPN at the cost of lower maximum EF (large-pad/HD: max EF[V/m] = 0.37/0.11, number of cortical sub-regions that EF exceeds 50% of the max = 77/13). For defining stimulation targets based on EF patterns, using group-level head models compared to a single standard head model results in comparable but significantly different seed locations (6.43 mm Euclidean distance between the locations of the frontal maximum EF in standard-space). As expected, significant task-based/resting-state connections were only found between frontal-parietal locations in the informed montage. Cue-induced craving score was correlated with frontoparietal connectivity only in the informed montage (r = −0.24). Stimulation intensity in the informed montage, and not in the classic HD montage, needs 40% reduction in the parietal site to reduce the disparity in EF between stimulation sites. Conclusion: This study provides some empirical insights to montage and dose selection in dual-site-tACS using individual brain structures and functions and proposes a computational pathway to use head models and functional MRI to define (1) optimum electrode montage for targeting FPN in a context of interest (drug-cue-reactivity) and (2) proper transcranial stimulation intensity.
