Cited by 308Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesUltrasound and Hyperthermia ApplicationsAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications

Coil design considerations for deep transcranial magnetic stimulation

Open access
Deng, Zhi-De, Lisanby, Sarah H., Peterchev, Angel V.·2014·Clinical Neurophysiology

Abstract

Objectives To explore the field characteristics and design tradeoffs of coils for deep transcranial magnetic stimulation (dTMS).Methods We simulated parametrically two dTMS coil designs on a spherical head model using the finite element method, and compare them with five commercial TMS coils, including two that are FDA approved for the treatment of depression (ferromagnetic-core figure-8 and H1 coil).Results Smaller coils have a focality advantage over larger coils; however, this advantage diminishes with increasing target depth. Smaller coils have the disadvantage of producing stronger field in the superficial cortex and requiring more energy. When the coil dimensions are large relative to the head size, the electric field decay in depth becomes linear, indicating that, at best, the electric field attenuation is directly proportional to the depth of the target. Ferromagnetic cores improve electrical efficiency for targeting superficial brain areas; however magnetic saturation reduces the effectiveness of the core for deeper targets, especially for highly focal coils. Distancing winding segments from the head, as in the H1 coil, increases the required stimulation energy.Conclusions Among standard commercial coils, the double cone coil offers high energy efficiency and balance between stimulated volume and superficial field strength. Direct TMS of targets at depths of ~4 cm or more results in superficial stimulation strength that exceeds the upper limit in current rTMS safety guidelines. Approaching depths of ~6 cm is almost certainly unsafe considering the excessive superficial stimulation strength and activated brain volume.Significance Coil design limitations and tradeoffs are important for rational and safe exploration of dTMS.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.clinph.2013.11.038

Cites

109 of 109 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Deng, Z.-D., Lisanby, S. H., & Peterchev, A. V.
Affiliations
Duke University (US)
Corresponding author
Peterchev, Angel V.
Venue
Clinical Neurophysiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-06
Volume
125
Issue
6
Pages
1202-1212
ISSN
1388-2457 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1964194422
Cited by
308
References
109
Citations by year
2026: 26 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 1
FWCI
7.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Clinical Neurophysiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and Depression
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Office of Science
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH060884, U01MH084241, R01MH091083)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R21NS078687)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Ultrasound and Hyperthermia Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Keywords
deep transcranial magnetic stimulation, coil design, magnetic field distribution, electric field attenuation, double-cone coil, magnetic saturation, focal stimulation, depression treatment, spherical head model
MeSH terms
Equipment Design, Equipment Safety, Humans, Models, Anatomic, Guidelines as Topic, Finite Element Analysis, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review