Paper detail

Influence of segmentation accuracy in structural MR head scans on electric field computation for TMS and tES

In several diagnosis and therapy procedures based on electrostimulation effect, the internal physical quantity related to the stimulation is the induced electric field. To estimate the induced electric field in an individual human model, the segmentation of anatomical imaging, such as (magnetic resonance image (MRI) scans, of the corresponding body parts into tissues is required. Then, electrical properties associated with different annotated tissues are assigned to the digital model to generate a volume conductor. An open question is how segmentation accuracy of different tissues would influence the distribution of the induced electric field. In this study, we applied parametric segmentation of different tissues to exploit the segmentation of available MRI to generate different quality of head models using deep learning neural network architecture, named ForkNet. Then, the induced electric field are compared to assess the effect of model segmentation variations. Computational results indicate that the influence of segmentation error is tissue-dependent. In brain, sensitivity to segmentation accuracy is relatively high in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), moderate in gray matter (GM) and low in white matter for transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and transcranial electrical stimulation (tES). A CSF segmentation accuracy reduction of 10% in terms of Dice coefficient (DC) lead to decrease up to 4% in normalized induced electric field in both applications. However, a GM segmentation accuracy reduction of 5.6% DC leads to increase of normalized induced electric field up to 6%. Opposite trend of electric field variation was found between CSF and GM for both TMS and tES. The finding obtained here would be useful to quantify potential uncertainty of computational results.

preprint2021arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors4 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.