This study reveals a multi-layer analytical framework for predicting insertion loss in neuromodulation, suggesting improvements in CT-informed procedural planning.
Objective Transcranial focused ultrasound (tFUS) for neuromodulation has attracted increasing attention, yet accurate pre-procedural planning and dose estimation is constrained by oversimplified skull representations and by the neglect of transducer-skull spacing induced wave interactions. This study aims to develop and validate a computationally efficient, CT-informed analytical framework for predicting frequency-dependent insertion loss. Approach We propose a multi-layer analytical framework that incorporates four key factors - skull thickness, skull density ratio (SDR), ultrasound insertion angle, and the transducer physical geometry and spacing from the skull – to predict frequency-dependent pressure insertion loss. Model accuracy was evaluated against k-Wave simulations and hydrophone measurements in 20 ex-vivo human skulls across 100 kHz to 1000 kHz frequency range. Main results Median root-mean-squared errors (RMSE) for peak pressure insertion loss were +1.1 dB relative to measurement and -1.7 dB relative to simulation. The relative median RMSE in percentage are: +30.1% and -20.3%, respectively. Median spearman correlation and cosine similarity values reached 0.92 (p<0.001) and 0.73, respectively. Uncertainty analysis showed that varying transducer-skull spacing altered predicted pressure insertion loss by -2.0 dB to +1.4 dB, with a median absolute percentage uncertainty of 18.1%. These results demonstrated that the proposed analytical model attains near-measurement accuracy while remaining computationally lightweight. Significance The balance of accuracy and efficiency of the proposed CT-informed multi-layer model makes it a practical tool for transducer positioning, frequency selection, and dose control in tFUS neuromodulation, with potential to improve reproducibility and safety in clinical applications.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: