Concordance Between BeamF3 and MRI-neuronavigated Target Sites for Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation of the Left Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex

Arsalan Mir-Moghtadaei, Ruth Caballero, Peter Fried, Michael D Fox, Katherine Lee, Peter Giacobbe, Zafiris J Daskalakis, Daniel M Blumberger, Jonathan Downar, Arsalan Mir-Moghtadaei, Ruth Caballero, Peter Fried, Michael D Fox, Katherine Lee, Peter Giacobbe, Zafiris J Daskalakis, Daniel M Blumberger, Jonathan Downar

Abstract

Background: The dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) is a common target for repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in major depression, but the conventional "5 cm rule" misses DLPFC in >1/3 cases. Another heuristic, BeamF3, locates the F3 EEG site from scalp measurements. MRI-guided neuronavigation is more onerous, but can target a specific DLPFC stereotaxic coordinate directly. The concordance between these two approaches has not previously been assessed.

Objective: To quantify the discrepancy in scalp site between BeamF3 versus MRI-guided neuronavigation for left DLPFC.

Methods: Using 100 pre-treatment MRIs from subjects undergoing left DLPFC-rTMS, we localized the scalp site at minimum Euclidean distance from a target MNI coordinate (X - 38 Y + 44 Z + 26) derived from our previous work. We performed nasion-inion, tragus-tragus, and head-circumference measurements on the same subjects' MRIs, and applied the BeamF3 heuristic. We then compared the distance between BeamF3 and MRI-guided scalp sites.

Results: BeamF3-to-MRI-guided discrepancies were <0.65 cm in 50% of subjects, <0.99 cm in 75% of subjects, and <1.36 cm in 95% of subjects. The angle from midline to the scalp site did not differ significantly using MRI-guided versus BeamF3 methods. However, the length of the radial arc from vertex to target site was slightly but significantly longer (mean 0.35 cm) with MRI-guidance versus BeamF3.

Conclusions: The BeamF3 heuristic may provide a reasonable approximation to MRI-guided neuronavigation for locating left DLPFC in a majority of subjects. A minor optimization of the heuristic may yield additional concordance.

Keywords: Magnetic resonance imaging; Neuronavigation; Prefrontal cortex; Scalp; Transcranial magnetic stimulation.

Copyright © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Comparison of scalp sites for BeamF3 versus MRI-guided methods. Using the cardinal scalp measurements (obtained as in Fig. 3), the BeamF3 algorithm returned values for circumferential arc X and radial arc Y, thereby indicating a scalp location for F3, to be used in stimulating left DLPFC. The BeamF3-generated measurement for Arc X was first traced along the head circumference (A) and the image volume then resliced through the vertical plane from the vertex through point X. The BeamF3-generated measurement for Arc Y was then traced along the scalp in this plane (B) to locate the BeamF3 point. The distance between the BeamF3 scalp site and the scalp site at minimum distance from the MRI-guided coordinate was then measured (C) to quantify the discrepancy. Finally, the image volume was again resliced in the vertical plane from the vertex through the MRI-guided scalp site rather than the BeamF3 site, in order to measure empirical MRI-guided values for parameters X and Y for comparison to the BeamF3-generated values.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Determination of cardinal scalp measurements for BeamF3 localization of site for left DLPFC stimulation. Using the curvilinear measurement tool in Osirix 5.9 software, measurements were performed in each subject to determine (A) the length of the nasion-inion scalp surface line along the midline, as well as the positions for the vertex (Cz) at the midpoint of this line, and the points FPz and Oz at 10% of the nasion-inion distance from each end; (B) the head circumference in the horizontal plane passing through FPz and Oz; and (C) the length of the left tragus-right tragus scalp line along a plane through the vertex. These measurements served as inputs for the BeamF3 method for locating the scalp point for left DLPFC stimulation.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Approach for MRI-based localization of scalp site for left DLPFC stimulation. In each subject, the site of the MNI stereotaxic coordinate [X − 38 Y + 44 Z + 26] was first localized using the Visor 2.0 neuronavigation system (indicated as DLPFC in this figure). Next, the scalp site at minimum Euclidean distance from this coordinate was located in each subject (shown here in coronal, axial, sagittal, and surface-rendered views). Finally, this scalp site was marked and the image volume and marker exported in DICOM format for comparison to scalp-based localization methods as illustrated in Fig. 1.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Cumulative distributions for X and Y parameters using BeamF3 and MRI-guided approaches. Values for the X and Y localization parameters, expressed in terms relative to cardinal scalp measurements, are depicted here as cumulative distributions across the entire patient sample for the BeamF3 (A, B) versus the MRI-guided (C, D) scalp sites for left DLPFC stimulation.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Cumulative distribution for the absolute values of the distance between BeamF3 and MRI-guided scalp sites. Values for the distance between the scalp site localized using the BeamF3 approach versus the scalp site localized using the MRI-guided approach to left DLPFC stimulation, depicted here as a cumulative distribution across the entire patient sample.

References

    1. Lefaucheur J-P, André-Obadia N, Antal A, et al. Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) Clin Neurophysiol. 2014 Nov;125(11):2150–206.
    1. Eggers C, Günther M, Rothwell J, Timmermann L, Ruge D. Theta burst stimulation over the supplementary motor area in Parkinson’s disease. J Neurol. 2015 Feb;262(2):357–64.
    1. O’Connell NE, Wand BM, Marston L, Spencer S, Desouza LH. Non-invasive brain stimulation techniques for chronic pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;4:CD008208.
    1. Mantovani A, Simpson HB, Fallon BA, Rossi S, Lisanby SH. Randomized sham-controlled trial of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in treatment-resistant obsessive-compulsive disorder. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2010;13:217–27.
    1. Isserles M, Shalev AY, Roth Y, et al. Effectiveness of deep transcranial magnetic stimulation combined with a brief exposure procedure in post-traumatic stress disorder –a pilot study. Brain Stimul. 2013;6:377–83.
    1. Downar J, Sankar A, Giacobbe P, Woodside B, Colton P. Unanticipated rapid remission of refractory bulimia nervosa, during high-dose repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex: a case report. Front Psychiatry. 2012;3:30.
    1. Van den Eynde F, Guillaume S, Broadbent H, Campbell IC, Schmidt U. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in anorexia nervosa: a pilot study. Eur Psychiatry. 2013;28:98–101.
    1. Pascual-Leone A, Rubio B, Pallardó F, Catalá M. Rapid-rate transcranial magnetic stimulation of left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in drug-resistant depression. Lancet. 1996;348:233237.
    1. Fitzgerald PB, Hoy K, Gunewardene R, et al. A randomized trial of unilateral and bilateral prefrontal cortex transcranial magnetic stimulation in treatment-resistant major depression. Psychol Med. 2011;41:1187–96.
    1. O’Reardon J, Solvason H, Janicak P, et al. Efficacy and safety of transcranial magnetic stimulation in the acute treatment of major depression: a multisite randomized controlled trial. Biol Psychiatry. 2007;62:1208–16.
    1. George M, Lisanby S, Avery D, et al. Daily left prefrontal transcranial magnetic stimulation therapy for major depressive disorder: a sham-controlled randomized trial. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2010;67:507–16.
    1. Berlim MT, van den Eynde F, Tovar-Perdomo S, Daskalakis ZJ. Response, remission and drop-out rates following high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for treating major depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, double-blind and sham-controlled trials. Psychol Med. 2014;44:225–39.
    1. Lam RW, Chan P, Wilkins-Ho M, Yatham LN. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for treatment-resistant depression: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Can J Psychiatry. 2008;53:621–31.
    1. Fox MD, Buckner RL, White MP, Greicius MD, Pascual-Leone A. Efficacy of transcranial magnetic stimulation targets for depression is related to intrinsic functional connectivity with the subgenual cingulate. Biol Psychiatry. 2012;72:595–603.
    1. Herbsman T, Avery D, Ramsey D, et al. More lateral and anterior prefrontal coil location is associated with better repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation antidepressant response. Biol Psychiatry. 2009;66:509–15.
    1. Downar J, Daskalakis ZJ. New targets for rTMS in depression: a review of convergent evidence. Brain Stimul. 2013;6:231–40.
    1. Bakker N, Shahab S, Giacobbe P, et al. rTMS of the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex for major depression: safety, tolerability, effectiveness, and outcome predictors for 10 Hz versus intermittent theta-burst stimulation. Brain Stimul. 2015 Mar-Apr;8(2):208–15.
    1. Schutter DJ, Laman DM, van Honk J, Vergouwen AC, Koerselman GF. Partial clinical response to 2 weeks of 2 Hz repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation to the right parietal cortex in depression. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2009;12:643–50.
    1. Isenberg K, Downs D, Pierce K, et al. Low frequency rTMS stimulation of the right frontal cortex is as effective as high frequency rTMS stimulation of the left frontal cortex for antidepressant-free, treatment-resistant depressed patients. Ann Clin Psychiatry. 2005;17:153–9.
    1. Blumberger DM, Mulsant BH, Fitzgerald PB, et al. A randomized double-blind sham-controlled comparison of unilateral and bilateral repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for treatment-resistant major depression. World J Biol Psychiatry. 2012;13:423–35.
    1. Berlim MT, Van den Eynde F, Daskalakis ZJ. A systematic review and meta-analysis on the efficacy and acceptability of bilateral repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for treating major depression. Psychol Med. 2013;43:2245–54.
    1. Ahmed MA, Darwish ES, Khedr EM, El Serogy YM, Ali AM. Effects of low versus high frequencies of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on cognitive function and cortical excitability in Alzheimer’s dementia. J Neurol. 2012;259:83–92.
    1. Lee SJ, Kim DY, Chun MH, Kim YG. The effect of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on fibromyalgia: a randomized sham-controlled trial with 1-mo follow-up. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2012;91:1077–85.
    1. Karsen EF, Watts BV, Holtzheimer PE. Review of the effectiveness of transcranial magnetic stimulation for post-traumatic stress disorder. Brain Stimul. 2014;7:151–7.
    1. Sachdev P, Loo C, Mitchell P, McFarquhar T, Malhi G. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for the treatment of obsessive compulsive disorder: a double-blind controlled investigation. Psychol Med. 2007;37:1645–9.
    1. Höppner J, Broese T, Wendler L, Berger C, Thome J. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for treatment of alcohol dependence. World J Biol Psychiatry. 2011;12(Suppl 1):57–62.
    1. Herwig U, Padberg F, Unger J, Spitzer M, Schönfeldt-Lecuona C. Transcranial magnetic stimulation in therapy studies: examination of the reliability of “standard” coil positioning by neuronavigation. Biol Psychiatry. 2001;50:58–61.
    1. Ahdab R, Ayache SS, Brugières P, Goujon C, Lefaucheur J-PP. Comparison of “standard” and “navigated” procedures of TMS coil positioning over motor, premotor and prefrontal targets in patients with chronic pain and depression. Neurophysiol Clin. 2010;40:27–36.
    1. Bradfield N, Reutens D, Chen J, Wood A. Stereotaxic localisation of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex for transcranial magnetic stimulation is superior to the standard reference position. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2012;46:232–9.
    1. Fitzgerald PB, Hoy K, McQueen S, et al. A randomized trial of rTMS targeted with MRI based neuronavigation in treatment-resistant depression. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2009;34:1255–62.
    1. Herwig U, Satrapi P, Schönfeldt-Lecuona C. Using the international 10–20 EEG system for positioning of transcranial magnetic stimulation. Brain Topogr. 2003;16:95–9.
    1. Guse B, Falkai P, Gruber O, et al. The effect of long-term high frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on working memory in schizophrenia and healthy controls –a randomized placebo-controlled, double-blind fMRI study. Behav Brain Res. 2013;237:300–7.
    1. Beam W, Borckardt J, Reeves S, George M. An efficient and accurate new method for locating the F3 position for prefrontal TMS applications. Brain Stimul. 2009;2:50–4.
    1. Rusjan PM, Barr MS, Farzan F, et al. Optimal transcranial magnetic stimulation coil placement for targeting the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex using novel magnetic resonance image-guided neuronavigation. Hum Brain Mapp. 2010;31:1643–52.
    1. Fried P, Rushmore R, Moss M, Valero-Cabré A, Pascual-Leone A. Causal evidence supporting functional dissociation of verbal and spatial working memory in the human dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Eur J Neurosci. 2014;39:1973–81.
    1. Petrides M. Lateral prefrontal cortex: architectonic and functional organization. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2005;360:781–95.
    1. Petrides M, Pandya DN. Dorsolateral prefrontal cortex: comparative cytoarchitectonic analysis in the human and the macaque brain and cortico-cortical connection patterns. Eur J Neurosci. 1999;11:1011–36.
    1. Pandya DN, Yeterian EH. Comparison of prefrontal architecture and connections. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1996;351:1423–32.
    1. Lozano A, Mayberg H, Giacobbe P, Hamani C, Craddock R, Kennedy S. Sub-callosal cingulate gyrus deep brain stimulation for treatment-resistant depression. Biol Psychiatry. 2008;64:461–7.
    1. Nemeroff CB. Prevalence and management of treatment-resistant depression. J Clin Psychiatry. 2007;68(Suppl 8):17–25.
    1. Lipsman N, Sankar T, Downar J, Kennedy SH, Lozano AM, Giacobbe P. Neuromodulation for treatment-refractory major depressive disorder. CMAJ. 2014;186:33–9.
    1. Fitzgerald P, McQueen S, Herring S, et al. A study of the effectiveness of high-frequency left prefrontal cortex transcranial magnetic stimulation in major depression in patients who have not responded to right-sided stimulation. Psychiatry Res. 2009;169:12–5.
    1. Rajkowska G, Goldman-Rakic PS. Cytoarchitectonic definition of prefrontal areas in the normal human cortex: II. Variability in locations of areas 9 and 46 and relationship to the Talairach Coordinate System. Cereb Cortex. 1995;5:323–37.
    1. Fox MD, Liu H, Pascual-Leone A. Identification of reproducible individualized targets for treatment of depression with TMS based on intrinsic connectivity. Neuroimage. 2013;66:151–60.
    1. Sack AT, Cohen Kadosh R, Schuhmann T, Moerel M, Walsh V, Goebel R. Optimizing functional accuracy of TMS in cognitive studies: a comparison of methods. J Cogn Neurosci. 2009;21:207–21.
    1. Mueller S, Wang D, Fox MD, et al. Individual variability in functional connectivity architecture of the human brain. Neuron. 2013;77:586–95.
    1. Speer A, Benson B, Kimbrell T, et al. Opposite effects of high and low frequency rTMS on mood in depressed patients: relationship to baseline cerebral activity on PET. J Affect Disord. 2009;115:386–94.
    1. Paillère Martinot ML, Galinowski A, Ringuenet D, et al. Influence of prefrontal target region on the efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in patients with medication-resistant depression: a [(18)F]-fluorodeoxyglucose PET and MRI study. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2010;13:45–59.

Source: PubMed

スポンサーと協力者

医学的状態

薬物療法

3
購読する