Comparison of effectiveness between cork-screw and peg-screw electrodes for transcranial motor evoked potential monitoring using the finite element method

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Intraoperative monitoring of motor evoked potentials by transcranial electric stimulation is popular in neurosurgery for monitoring motor function preservation. Some authors have reported that the peg-screw electrodes screwed into the skull can more effectively conduct current to the brain compared to subdermal cork-screw electrodes screwed into the skin. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of electrode design on transcranial motor evoked potential monitoring. We estimated differences in effectiveness between the cork-screw electrode, peg-screw electrode, and cortical electrode to produce electric fields in the brain. Methods: We used the finite element method to visualize electric fields in the brain generated by transcranial electric stimulation using realistic three-dimensional head models developed from T1-weighted images. Surfaces from five layers of the head were separated as accurately as possible. We created the "cork-screws model," "1 peg-screw model," "peg-screws model," and "cortical electrode model." Results: Electric fields in the brain radially diffused from the brain surface at a maximum just below the electrodes in coronal sections. The coronal sections and surface views of the brain showed higher electric field distributions under the peg-screw compared to the cork-screw. An extremely high electric field was observed under cortical electrodes. Conclusion: Our main finding was that the intensity of electric fields in the brain are higher in the peg-screw model than the cork-screw model.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)S791-S796
JournalSurgical Neurology International
Volume7
Issue number33
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2016

Fingerprint

Motor Evoked Potentials
Electrodes
Brain
Electric Stimulation
Head
Intraoperative Monitoring
Neurosurgery
Skull
Skin

Keywords

  • Finite element method
  • screw
  • transcranial electric stimulation
  • transcranial motor evoked potential

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Clinical Neurology

Cite this

@article{38bc458886f3480dabf49027fc9d90af,
title = "Comparison of effectiveness between cork-screw and peg-screw electrodes for transcranial motor evoked potential monitoring using the finite element method",
abstract = "Intraoperative monitoring of motor evoked potentials by transcranial electric stimulation is popular in neurosurgery for monitoring motor function preservation. Some authors have reported that the peg-screw electrodes screwed into the skull can more effectively conduct current to the brain compared to subdermal cork-screw electrodes screwed into the skin. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of electrode design on transcranial motor evoked potential monitoring. We estimated differences in effectiveness between the cork-screw electrode, peg-screw electrode, and cortical electrode to produce electric fields in the brain. Methods: We used the finite element method to visualize electric fields in the brain generated by transcranial electric stimulation using realistic three-dimensional head models developed from T1-weighted images. Surfaces from five layers of the head were separated as accurately as possible. We created the {"}cork-screws model,{"} {"}1 peg-screw model,{"} {"}peg-screws model,{"} and {"}cortical electrode model.{"} Results: Electric fields in the brain radially diffused from the brain surface at a maximum just below the electrodes in coronal sections. The coronal sections and surface views of the brain showed higher electric field distributions under the peg-screw compared to the cork-screw. An extremely high electric field was observed under cortical electrodes. Conclusion: Our main finding was that the intensity of electric fields in the brain are higher in the peg-screw model than the cork-screw model.",
keywords = "Finite element method, screw, transcranial electric stimulation, transcranial motor evoked potential",
author = "Ryosuke Tomio and Takenori Akiyama and Takayuki Oohira and Kazunari Yoshida",
year = "2016",
doi = "10.4103/2152-7806.193929",
language = "English",
volume = "7",
pages = "S791--S796",
journal = "Surgical Neurology International",
issn = "2152-7806",
publisher = "Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd",
number = "33",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of effectiveness between cork-screw and peg-screw electrodes for transcranial motor evoked potential monitoring using the finite element method

AU - Tomio, Ryosuke

AU - Akiyama, Takenori

AU - Oohira, Takayuki

AU - Yoshida, Kazunari

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - Intraoperative monitoring of motor evoked potentials by transcranial electric stimulation is popular in neurosurgery for monitoring motor function preservation. Some authors have reported that the peg-screw electrodes screwed into the skull can more effectively conduct current to the brain compared to subdermal cork-screw electrodes screwed into the skin. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of electrode design on transcranial motor evoked potential monitoring. We estimated differences in effectiveness between the cork-screw electrode, peg-screw electrode, and cortical electrode to produce electric fields in the brain. Methods: We used the finite element method to visualize electric fields in the brain generated by transcranial electric stimulation using realistic three-dimensional head models developed from T1-weighted images. Surfaces from five layers of the head were separated as accurately as possible. We created the "cork-screws model," "1 peg-screw model," "peg-screws model," and "cortical electrode model." Results: Electric fields in the brain radially diffused from the brain surface at a maximum just below the electrodes in coronal sections. The coronal sections and surface views of the brain showed higher electric field distributions under the peg-screw compared to the cork-screw. An extremely high electric field was observed under cortical electrodes. Conclusion: Our main finding was that the intensity of electric fields in the brain are higher in the peg-screw model than the cork-screw model.

AB - Intraoperative monitoring of motor evoked potentials by transcranial electric stimulation is popular in neurosurgery for monitoring motor function preservation. Some authors have reported that the peg-screw electrodes screwed into the skull can more effectively conduct current to the brain compared to subdermal cork-screw electrodes screwed into the skin. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of electrode design on transcranial motor evoked potential monitoring. We estimated differences in effectiveness between the cork-screw electrode, peg-screw electrode, and cortical electrode to produce electric fields in the brain. Methods: We used the finite element method to visualize electric fields in the brain generated by transcranial electric stimulation using realistic three-dimensional head models developed from T1-weighted images. Surfaces from five layers of the head were separated as accurately as possible. We created the "cork-screws model," "1 peg-screw model," "peg-screws model," and "cortical electrode model." Results: Electric fields in the brain radially diffused from the brain surface at a maximum just below the electrodes in coronal sections. The coronal sections and surface views of the brain showed higher electric field distributions under the peg-screw compared to the cork-screw. An extremely high electric field was observed under cortical electrodes. Conclusion: Our main finding was that the intensity of electric fields in the brain are higher in the peg-screw model than the cork-screw model.

KW - Finite element method

KW - screw

KW - transcranial electric stimulation

KW - transcranial motor evoked potential

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85009260142&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85009260142&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.4103/2152-7806.193929

DO - 10.4103/2152-7806.193929

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85009260142

VL - 7

SP - S791-S796

JO - Surgical Neurology International

JF - Surgical Neurology International

SN - 2152-7806

IS - 33

ER -