Changes in Corticospinal Excitability and Motor Control During Cerebellar Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Healthy Individuals

Effects of cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation on the excitability of spinal motor neurons and vestibulospinal tract in healthy individuals

Cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation (ctDCS) modulates cerebellar cortical excitability in a polarity-dependent manner and affects inhibitory pathways from the cerebellum. The cerebellum modulates spinal reflex excitability via the vestibulospinal tract and other pathways projecting to the spinal motor neurons; however, the effects of ctDCS on the excitability of spinal motor neurons and vestibulospinal tract remain unclear. The experiment involved 13 healthy individuals. ctDCS (sham-ctDCS, anodal-ctDCS, and cathodal-ctDCS) was applied to the cerebellar vermis at 2 mA with an interval of at least 3 days between each condition. We measured the maximal M-wave (Mmax) and maximal H-reflex (Hmax) in the right soleus muscle to assess the excitability of spinal motor neurons. We applied galvanic vestibular stimulation (GVS) for 200 ms at 100 ms before tibial nerve stimulation to measure Hmax conditioned by GVS (GVS-Hmax) and calculated the change rate of Hmax by GVS as the excitability of vestibulospinal tract. We measured the Mmax, Hmax, and GVS-Hmax before, during, and after ctDCS in the sitting posture. No main effects of tDCS condition, main effects of time, or interaction effects were observed in Hmax/Mmax or the change rate of Hmax by GVS. It has been suggested that ctDCS does not affect the excitability of spinal motor neurons and vestibulospinal tract, as measured by neurophysiological methods, such as the H-reflex, in healthy individuals in a sitting posture. Effect of ctDCS on other descending pathways to spinal motor neurons, the neurological mechanism of tDCS and the cerebellar activity during the experiment may have contributed to these results. Therefore, we need to investigate the involvement of the cerebellum in Hmax/Mmax and the change rate of Hmax by GVS under different neuromodulation techniques and postural conditions.

Cerebellar Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation: A Frontier in Chronic Pain Therapy

Chronic pain poses a widespread and distressing challenge; it can be resistant to conventional therapies, often having significant side effects. Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) techniques offer promising avenues for the safe and swift modulation of brain excitability. NIBS approaches for chronic pain management targeting the primary motor area have yielded variable outcomes. Recently, the cerebellum has emerged as a pivotal hub in human pain processing; however, the clinical application of cerebellar NIBS in chronic pain treatment remains limited. This review delineates the cerebellum's role in pain modulation, recent advancements in NIBS for cerebellar activity modulation, and novel biomarkers for assessing cerebellar function in humans. Despite notable progress in NIBS techniques and cerebellar activity assessment, studies targeting cerebellar NIBS for chronic pain treatment are limited in number. Nevertheless, positive outcomes in pain alleviation have been reported with cerebellar anodal transcranial direct current stimulation. Our review underscores the potential for further integration between cerebellar NIBS and non-invasive assessments of cerebellar function to advance chronic pain treatment strategies.

Changes in cerebellar output abnormally modulate cortical myoclonus sensorimotor hyperexcitability

Cortical myoclonus is produced by abnormal neuronal discharges within the sensorimotor cortex, as demonstrated by electrophysiology. Our hypothesis is that the loss of cerebellar inhibitory control over the motor cortex, via cerebello-thalamo-cortical connections, could induce the increased sensorimotor cortical excitability that eventually causes cortical myoclonus. To explore this hypothesis, in the present study we applied anodal transcranial direct current stimulation over the cerebellum of patients affected by cortical myoclonus and healthy controls and assessed its effect on sensorimotor cortex excitability. We expected that anodal cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation would increase the inhibitory cerebellar drive to the motor cortex and therefore reduce the sensorimotor cortex hyperexcitability observed in cortical myoclonus. Ten patients affected by cortical myoclonus of various aetiology and 10 aged-matched healthy control subjects were included in the study. All participants underwent somatosensory evoked potentials, long-latency reflexes and short-interval intracortical inhibition recording at baseline and immediately after 20 min session of cerebellar anodal transcranial direct current stimulation. In patients, myoclonus was recorded by the means of surface EMG before and after the cerebellar stimulation. Anodal cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation did not change the above variables in healthy controls, while it significantly increased the amplitude of somatosensory evoked potential cortical components, long-latency reflexes and decreased short-interval intracortical inhibition in patients; alongside, a trend towards worsening of the myoclonus after the cerebellar stimulation was observed. Interestingly, when dividing patients in those with and without giant somatosensory evoked potentials, the increment of the somatosensory evoked potential cortical components was observed mainly in those with giant potentials. Our data showed that anodal cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation facilitates-and does not inhibit-sensorimotor cortex excitability in cortical myoclonus syndromes. This paradoxical response might be due to an abnormal homeostatic plasticity within the sensorimotor cortex, driven by dysfunctional cerebello-thalamo-cortical input to the motor cortex. We suggest that the cerebellum is implicated in the pathophysiology of cortical myoclonus and that these results could open the way to new forms of treatment or treatment targets.

Exploring the Differential Effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation: A Comparative Analysis of Motor Cortex and Cerebellar Stimulation

Background

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation technique. Constant electric current is passed through the patient's scalp with the aim of modulating cortical excitability. Stroke is a cerebrovascular disease characterized by hemorrhage or cerebral ischemia. This systematic review and meta-analysis are aimed at comparing the efficacy of motor cortex stimulation with that of cerebellar stimulation by using transcranial direct current stimulation.

Method

Google Scholar, PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Physiotherapy Evidence Database (Pedro) databases were searched for studies. The extracted qualitative data was synthesized systematically. Cochrane RevMan software was used to conduct a meta-analysis of quantitative data. The fixed effects mean difference of the collected data was calculated at a 95% confidence interval (CI) for the changes in balance and side effects.

Results

This research included 10 articles with seven studies assessing changes in balance (outcome measured in CoP and FMA scores) and side effects (tingling and itching were the most prevalent). There was no significant difference between the efficacy levels of m1-tDCS versus ctDCS (P = 0.18), m1-tDCS versus sham (P = 0.92), and ctDCS versus sham (P = 0.19). Itching and tingling sensation were the most common and were significantly prevalent in sham interventions (P < 0.00001).

Conclusion

We found that motor cortex and cerebellar stimulations are both effective in improving motor function in stroke patients. There are no adverse effects to using the interventions besides mild itching and tingling experienced during the stimulation.

Excitatory cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation boosts the leverage of prior knowledge for predicting actions

The cerebellum causally supports social processing by generating internal models of social events based on statistical learning of behavioral regularities. However, whether the cerebellum is only involved in forming or also in using internal models for the prediction of forthcoming actions is still unclear. We used cerebellar transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (ctDCS) to modulate the performance of healthy adults in using previously learned expectations in an action prediction task. In a first learning phase of this task, participants were exposed to different levels of associations between specific actions and contextual elements, to induce the formation of either strongly or moderately informative expectations. In a following testing phase, which assessed the use of these expectations for predicting ambiguous (i.e. temporally occluded) actions, we delivered ctDCS. Results showed that anodic, compared to sham, ctDCS boosted the prediction of actions embedded in moderately, but not strongly, informative contexts. Since ctDCS was delivered during the testing phase, that is after expectations were established, our findings suggest that the cerebellum is causally involved in using internal models (and not just in generating them). This encourages the exploration of the clinical effects of ctDCS to compensate poor use of predictive internal models for social perception.

Investigation of Neuromodulatory Effect of Anodal Cerebellar Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on the Primary Motor Cortex Using Functional Near-Infrared Spectroscopy

Cerebellar brain inhibition (CBI), a neural connection between the cerebellum and primary motor cortex (M1), has been researched as a target pathway for neuromodulation to improve clinical outcomes in various neurological diseases. However, conflicting results of anodal cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation (acb-tDCS) on M1 excitability indicate that additional investigation is required to examine its precise effect. This study aimed to gather evidence of the neuromodulatory effect of acb-tDCS on the M1 using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS). Sixteen healthy participants were included in this cross-over study. Participants received real and sham acb-tDCS randomly, with a minimum 1-week washout period between them. The anode and cathode were placed on the right cerebellum and the right buccinator muscle, respectively. Stimulation lasted 20 min at an intensity of 2 mA, and fNIRS data were recorded for 42 min (including a 4-min baseline before stimulation and an 18-min post-stimulation duration) using eight channels attached bilaterally on the M1. acb-tDCS induced a significant decrease in oxyhemoglobin (HbO) concentration (inhibitory effect) in the left (contralateral) M1, whereas it induced a significant increase in HbO concentration (excitatory effect) in the right (ipsilateral) M1 compared to sham tDCS during (p < 0.05) and after stimulation (p < 0.01) in a group level analysis. At the individual level, variations in response to acb-tDCS were observed. Our findings demonstrate the neuromodulatory effects of acb-tDCS on the bilateral M1 in terms of neuronal hemodynamics.

Effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (t-DCS) of the Cerebellum on Pain Perception and Endogenous Pain Modulation: a Randomized, Monocentric, Double-Blind, Sham-Controlled Crossover Study

Accumulating evidence demonstrates a role of the cerebellum in nociception. Some studies suggest that this is mediated via endogenous pain modulation. Here, we used t-DCS to test the effects of modulation of cerebellar function on nociception and endogenous pain modulation. Anodal, cathodal, and sham cerebellar t-DCS were investigated in a cross-over design in 21 healthy subjects. The nociceptive flexor (RIII) reflex, conditioning pain modulation (CPM), and offset analgesia (OA) paradigms were used to assess endogenous pain modulation. Somatosensory evoked potentials (SEPs) and pain ratings were used to assess supraspinal nociception and pain perception, respectively. No significant t-DCS effects were detected when including all t-DCS types and time points (baseline, 0, 30, 60 min post t-DCS) in the analysis. Exploratory analysis revealed an increased RIII reflex size immediately after cathodal t-DCS (compared to sham, P = 0.046, η2p = 0.184), in parallel with a trend for a decrease in electrical pain thresholds (P = 0.094, η2p = 0.134), and increased N120 SEP amplitudes 30 min after cathodal compared to anodal t-DCS (P = 0.007, η2p = 0.374). OA was increased after anodal compared to sham stimulation (P = 0.023, η2p = 0.232). Exploratory results suggested that cathodal (inhibitory) cerebellar t-DCS increased pain perception and reduced endogenous pain inhibition while anodal (excitatory) t-DCS increased endogenous pain inhibition. Results are principally compatible with activation of endogenous pain inhibition by cerebellar excitation. However, maybe due to limited t-DCS skull penetration, effects were small and unlikely to be clinically significant.