bioRxivBioengineering
Modeling implanted metals in electrical stimulation applications
B. Mercadal, R. Salvador, M. C. Biagi, F. Bartolomei, F. Wendling, G. Ruffini
Abstract
BackgroundMetal implants impact the dosimetry assessment in electrical stimulation techniques. Therefore, they need to be included in numerical models. While currents in the body are ionic, metals only allow electron transport. In fact, charge transfer between tissues and metals requires electric fields to drive the electrochemical reactions at the interface. Thus, metal implants may act as insulators or as conductors depending on the scenario. Objective/HypothesisThe aim of this paper is to provide a theoretical argument that guides the choice of the correct representation of metal implants using purely electrical models but considering the electrochemical nature of the problem in the technology of interest. MethodsWe built a simple model of a metal implant exposed to a homogeneous electric field of various magnitudes to represent both weak (e.g., tDCS), medium (TMS) or strong field stimulation. The same geometry was solved using two different models: a purely electric one (with different conductivities for the implant), and an electrochemical one. As an example of application, we also modeled a transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) treatment in a realistic head model with a skull plate using a high and low conductivity value for the plate. ResultsMetal implants generally act as electric insulators when exposed to electric fields up to around 100 V/m (tES and TMS range) and they only resemble a perfect conductor for fields in the order of 1000 V/m and above. The results are independent of the implants metal, but they depend on its geometry. Conclusion(s)Metal implants can be accurately represented by a simple electrical model of constant conductivity, but an incorrect model choice can lead to large errors in the dosimetry assessment. In particular, tES modeling with implants incorrectly treated as conductors can lead to errors of 50% in induced fields or more. Our results can be used as a guide to select the correct model in each scenario.
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Biophysical modeling of the electric field magnitude and distribution induced by electrical stimulation with intracerebral electrodes
Fabiola Alonso, Borja Mercadal, … Julien Modolo·Biomedical Physics & Engineering ExpressPeer-reviewed·May 10, 2023
- Safety of Non-invasive Brain Stimulation in Patients with Implants: A Computational Study
Fariba Karimi, Antonino M. Cassarà, … Esra Neufeld·bioRxiv·Apr 19, 2024
- Head And Shoulders - The Impact Of An Extended Head Model On The Simulation And Optimization Of Transcranial Electric Stimulation
Sybren Van Hoornweder, Vittoria Cappozzo, … Axel Thielscher·Imaging NeurosciencePeer-reviewed·Jan 1, 2024
- A flexible workflow for simulating transcranial electric stimulation in healthy and lesioned brains
Benjamin Kalloch, Pierre‐Louis Bazin, … Mario Hlawitschka·PLoS ONEPeer-reviewed·May 14, 2020
- Electrical Fields Induced Inside the Rat Brain with Skin, Skull, and Dural Placements of the Current Injection Electrode
Ahmet S. Asan, Sinan Gok, Mesut Şahin·PLoS ONEPeer-reviewed·Jan 10, 2019
- Adaptive current-flow models of ECT: Explaining individual static impedance, dynamic impedance, and brain current delivery
G. Unal, J. K. Swami, … M. Bikson·bioRxiv·Nov 8, 2020