Confounding effects of caffeine on neuroplasticity induced by transcranial alternating current stimulation and paired associative stimulation

Opportunities and obstacles in non-invasive brain stimulation

Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) is a complex and multifaceted approach to modulating brain activity and holds the potential for broad accessibility. This work discusses the mechanisms of the four distinct approaches to modulating brain activity non-invasively: electrical currents, magnetic fields, light, and ultrasound. We examine the dual stochastic and deterministic nature of brain activity and its implications for NIBS, highlighting the challenges posed by inter-individual variability, nebulous dose-response relationships, potential biases and neuroanatomical heterogeneity. Looking forward, we propose five areas of opportunity for future research: closed-loop stimulation, consistent stimulation of the intended target region, reducing bias, multimodal approaches, and strategies to address low sample sizes.

The neurophysiological aftereffects of brain stimulation in human primary motor cortex: a Sham-controlled comparison of three protocols

Paired associative stimulation (PAS), transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), and transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) are non-invasive brain stimulation methods that are used to modulate cortical excitability. Whether one technique is superior to the others in achieving this outcome and whether individuals that respond to one intervention are more likely to respond to another remains largely unknown. In the present study, the neurophysiological aftereffects of three excitatory neurostimulation protocols were measured with transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Twenty minutes of PAS at an ISI of 25 ms, anodal tDCS, 20-Hz tACS, and Sham stimulation were administered to 31 healthy adults in a repeated measures design. Compared with Sham, none of the stimulation protocols significantly modulated corticospinal excitability (input/ouput curve and slope, TMS stimulator intensity required to elicit MEPs of 1-mV amplitude) or intracortical excitability (short- and long-interval intracortical inhibition, intracortical facilitation, cortical silent period). Sham-corrected responder analysis estimates showed that an average of 41 (PAS), 39 (tDCS), and 39% (tACS) of participants responded to the interventions with an increase in corticospinal excitability. The present data show that three stimulation protocols believed to increase cortical excitability are associated with highly heterogenous and variable aftereffects that may explain a lack of significant group effects.

Non-invasive brain stimulation and neuroenhancement

•

The available data frame with a wide parameter space of tES does not allow an overarching protocol recommendation.

•

Established engineering risk-management procedures with regard to manufacturing should be followed.

•

Consensus among experts is that tES for neuroenhancement is safe as long as tested protocols are followed.

Attempts to enhance human memory and learning ability have a long tradition in science. This topic has recently gained substantial attention because of the increasing percentage of older individuals worldwide and the predicted rise of age-associated cognitive decline in brain functions. Transcranial brain stimulation methods, such as transcranial magnetic (TMS) and transcranial electric (tES) stimulation, have been extensively used in an effort to improve cognitive functions in humans.

Here we summarize the available data on low-intensity tES for this purpose, in comparison to repetitive TMS and some pharmacological agents, such as caffeine and nicotine. There is no single area in the brain stimulation field in which only positive outcomes have been reported. For self-directed tES devices, how to restrict variability with regard to efficacy is an essential aspect of device design and function. As with any technique, reproducible outcomes depend on the equipment and how well this is matched to the experience and skill of the operator. For self-administered non-invasive brain stimulation, this requires device designs that rigorously incorporate human operator factors. The wide parameter space of non-invasive brain stimulation, including dose (e.g., duration, intensity (current density), number of repetitions), inclusion/exclusion (e.g., subject’s age), and homeostatic effects, administration of tasks before and during stimulation, and, most importantly, placebo or nocebo effects, have to be taken into account. The outcomes of stimulation are expected to depend on these parameters and should be strictly controlled. The consensus among experts is that low-intensity tES is safe as long as tested and accepted protocols (including, for example, dose, inclusion/exclusion) are followed and devices are used which follow established engineering risk-management procedures. Devices and protocols that allow stimulation outside these parameters cannot claim to be “safe” where they are applying stimulation beyond that examined in published studies that also investigated potential side effects.

Brain stimulation devices marketed for consumer use are distinct from medical devices because they do not make medical claims and are therefore not necessarily subject to the same level of regulation as medical devices (i.e., by government agencies tasked with regulating medical devices). Manufacturers must follow ethical and best practices in marketing tES stimulators, including not misleading users by referencing effects from human trials using devices and protocols not similar to theirs.

Directionality of the injected current targeting the P20/N20 source determines the efficacy of 140 Hz transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS)-induced aftereffects in the somatosensory cortex

Interindividual anatomical differences in the human cortex can lead to suboptimal current directions and may result in response variability of transcranial electrical stimulation methods. These differences in brain anatomy require individualized electrode stimulation montages to induce an optimal current density in the targeted area of each individual subject. We aimed to explore the possible modulatory effects of 140 Hz transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) on the somatosensory cortex using personalized multi-electrode stimulation montages. In two randomized experiments using either tactile finger or median nerve stimulation, we measured by evoked potentials the plasticity aftereffects and oscillatory power changes after 140 Hz tACS at 1.0 mA as compared to sham stimulation (n = 17, male = 9). We found a decrease in the power of oscillatory mu-rhythms during and immediately after tactile discrimination tasks, indicating an engagement of the somatosensory system during stimulus encoding. On a group level both the oscillatory power and the evoked potential amplitudes were not modulated by tACS neither after tactile finger stimulation nor after median nerve stimulation as compared to sham stimulation. On an individual level we could however demonstrate that lower angular difference (i.e., differences between the injected current vector in the target region and the source orientation vector) is associated with significantly higher changes in both P20/N20 and N30/P30 source activities. Our findings suggest that the higher the directionality of the injected current correlates to the dipole orientation the greater the tACS-induced aftereffects are.

Electroencephalographic connectivity predicts clinical response to repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in patients with insomnia disorder

BACKGROUND

Accumulating evidence suggests that low frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), which generally decreases cortical excitability and remodels plastic connectivity, improves sleep quality in patients with insomnia disorder. However, the effects of rTMS vary substantially across individuals and treatment is sometimes unsatisfactory, calling for biomarkers for predicting clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate whether functional connectivity of the target network in electroencephalography is associated with the clinical response to low frequency rTMS in patients with insomnia disorder.

METHODS

Twenty-five patients with insomnia disorder were subjected to 10 sessions of treatment with 1 Hz rTMS over the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Resting-state electroencephalography was collected before rTMS. Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale, and Mini-Mental State Exam were performed before and after rTMS treatment, with a follow-up after one month. Electroencephalographic connectivity was measured by the power envelope connectivity at the source level. Partial least squares regression identified models of connectivity that maximally accounted for the rTMS response.

RESULTS

Scores of Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale were decreased after rTMS and one-month later. Baseline weaker connectivity of a network in the beta and alpha bands between a brain region approximating the stimulated right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and areas located in the frontal, insular, and limbic cortices was associated with a greater change in Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index and Hamilton Depression Rating Scale following rTMS.

CONCLUSIONS

Low frequency rTMS could improve sleep quality and depressive moods in patients with insomnia disorder. Moreover, electroencephalographic functional connectivity would potentially be a robust biomarker for predicting the therapeutic effects.