Unihemispheric concurrent dual-site cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation: the effects on corticospinal excitability

Modulation of central pain mechanisms using high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation: A double-blind, sham-controlled study

BACKGROUND

The use of high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS) has shown analgesic effects in some chronic pain patients, but limited anti-nociceptive effects in healthy asymptomatic subjects.

METHODS

This double-blinded sham-controlled study assessed the effects of HD-tDCS applied on three consecutive days on central pain mechanisms in healthy participants with (N = 40) and without (N = 40) prolonged experimental pain induced by intramuscular injection of nerve growth factor into the right hand on Day 1. Participants were randomly assigned to Sham-tDCS (N = 20 with pain, N = 20 without) or Active-tDCS (N = 20 with pain, N = 20 without) targeting simultaneously the primary motor cortex and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex for 20 min with 2 mA stimulation intensity. Central pain mechanisms were assessed by cuff algometry on the legs measuring pressure pain sensitivity, temporal summation of pain (TSP) and conditioned pain modulation (CPM), at baseline and after HD-tDCS on Day 2 and Day 3. Based on subject's assessment of received HD-tDCS (sham or active), they were effectively blinded.

RESULTS

Compared with Sham-tDCS, Active-tDCS did not significantly reduce the average NGF-induced pain intensity. Tonic pain-induced temporal summation at Day 2 and Day 3 was significantly lower in the NGF-pain group under Active-tDCS compared to the pain group with Sham-tDCS (p ≤ 0.05). No significant differences were found in the cuff pressure pain detection/tolerance thresholds or CPM effect across the 3 days of HD-tDCS in any of the four groups.

CONCLUSION

HD-tDCS reduced the facilitation of TSP caused by tonic pain suggesting that efficacy of HD-tDCS might depend on the presence of sensitized central pain mechanisms.

Effectiveness of Unihemispheric Concurrent Dual-Site Stimulation over M1 and Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex Stimulation on Pain Processing: A Triple Blind Cross-Over Control Trial

BACKGROUND

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of the motor cortex (M1) produces short-term inhibition of pain. Unihemispheric concurrent dual-site tDCS (UHCDS-tDCS) over the M1 and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) has greater effects on cortical excitability than when applied alone, although its effect on pain is unknown. The aim of this study was to test if anodal UHCDS-tDCS over the M1 and DLPFC in healthy participants could potentiate conditioned pain modulation (CPM) and diminish pain temporal summation (TS).

METHODS

Thirty participants were randomized to receive a sequence of UHCDS-tDCS, M1-tDCS and sham-tDCS. A 20 min 0.1 mA/cm2 anodal or sham-tDCS intervention was applied to each participant during three test sessions, according to a triple-blind cross-over trial design. For the assessment of pain processing before and after tDCS intervention, the following tests were performed: tourniquet conditioned pain modulation (CPM), pressure pain temporal summation (TS), pressure pain thresholds (PPTs), pressure pain tolerance, mechanosensitivity and cold hyperalgesia. Motor function before and after tDCS intervention was assessed with a dynamometer to measure maximal isometric grip strength.

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences were found between groups for CPM, pressure pain TS, PPT, pressure pain tolerance, neural mechanosensitivity, cold hyperalgesia or grip strength (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Neither UHCDS-tDCS nor M1-tDCS facilitated CPM or inhibited TS in healthy subjects following one intervention session.

Genetic Polymorphisms Do Not Predict Interindividual Variability to Cathodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation of the Primary Motor Cortex

Introduction: High variability between individuals (i.e., interindividual variability) in response to transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has become a commonly reported issue in the tDCS literature in recent years. Inherent genetic differences between individuals have been proposed as a contributing factor to observed response variability. This study investigated whether tDCS interindividual variability was genetically mediated. Methods: A large sample size of 61 healthy males received cathodal tDCS (c-tDCS) and sham-tDCS of the primary motor cortex at 1 mA and 10 min via 6 × 4 cm active and 7 × 5 cm return electrodes. Corticospinal excitability (CSE) was assessed via 25 single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation motor-evoked potentials (MEPs). Intracortical inhibition was assessed via twenty-five 3 msec interstimulus interval (ISI) paired-pulse MEPs, known as short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI). Intracortical facilitation (ICF) was assessed via twenty-five 10 msec ISI paired-pulse MEPs. Gene variants encoding for excitatory and inhibitory neuroreceptors were determined via saliva samples. Predetermined thresholds and statistical cluster analyses were used to subgroup individuals. Results: Two distinct subgroups were identified, "responders" reducing CSE following c-tDCS and "nonresponders" showing no reduction or even increase in CSE. Differences in CSE between responders and nonresponders following c-tDCS were not explained by changes in SICI or ICF. Conclusions: No significant relationships were reported between gene variants and interindividual variability to c-tDCS, suggesting that the chosen gene variants did not influence the activity of the neuroreceptors involved in eliciting changes in CSE in responders following c-tDCS. In this largest c-tDCS study of its kind, novel insights were reported into the contribution genetic factors may play in observed interindividual variability to c-tDCS. Impact statement This study adds insight into the issue of interindividual variability to c-tDCS. It highlights not all individuals respond to c-tDCS similarly when exposed to the same stimulus parameters. This disparity in response to c-tDCS between individuals does not appear to be genetically mediated. For c-tDCS to progress to large-scale clinical application, reliability, predictability and reproducibility are essential. Systematically investigating factors contributing to interindividual variability take steps towards this progress the c-tDCS field towards the potential development of screening tools to determine clinical suitability to c-tDCS to ensure its application in those who may benefit the most.

Breaking the ice to improve motor outcomes in patients with chronic stroke: a retrospective clinical study on neuromodulation plus robotics

BACKGROUND

Stroke is one of the main causes of impairment affecting daily activities and quality of life. There is a growing effort to potentiate the recovery of functional gait and to enable stroke patients to walk independently.

AIM

To estimate the effects of dual-site transcranial direct current stimulation (dstDCS) on gait recovery in chronic stroke patients provided with robot-aided gait training (RAGT).

METHODS

Thirty-seven patients were included in this retrospective clinical study. Nine patients were provided with dstDCS during the first 10 min of RAGT by using Lokomat®Pro (on-RAGT), 15 patients immediately after RAGT (post-RAGT), and 13 patients immediately before RAGT (pre-RAGT).

RESULTS

Each group improved over time concerning disability burden and lower limb strength. on-RAGT and post-RAGT experienced better improvement in balance (p < 0.001) and, moderately, gait endurance (p = 0.04) as compared to pre-RAGT. Furthermore, all treatments decreased the facilitation of the unaffected hemisphere (p < 0.001) and the inhibition of the affected hemisphere (p < 0.001). The duration of such aftereffects was found to be greater for post-RAGT.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

This is the first trial with dstDCS coupled with RAGT in chronic stroke patients with gait impairment. When timely coupled with RAGT, dstDCS may be considered an effective tool for the recovery of lower limb function in patients with first unilateral stroke in the chronic phase. Moreover, our data suggest the ductility of dstDCS concerning RAGT timing, thus making this intervention suitable in a neurorehabilitation setting and well adaptable to patients' needs.

Can genetic polymorphisms predict response variability to anodal transcranial direct current stimulation of the primary motor cortex?

Genetic mediation of cortical plasticity and the role genetic variants play in previously observed response variability to transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) have become important issues in the tDCS literature in recent years. This study investigated whether inter-individual variability to tDCS was in-part genetically mediated. In 61 healthy males, anodal-tDCS (a-tDCS) and sham-tDCS were administered to the primary motor cortex at 1 mA for 10-min via 6 × 4 cm active and 7 × 5 cm return electrodes. Twenty-five single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) motor evoked potentials (MEP) were recorded to represent corticospinal excitability (CSE). Twenty-five paired-pulse MEPs were recorded with 3 ms inter-stimulus interval (ISI) to assess intracortical inhibition (ICI) via short-interval intracranial inhibition (SICI) and 10 ms ISI for intracortical facilitation (ICF). Saliva samples were tested for specific genetic polymorphisms in genes encoding for excitatory and inhibitory neuroreceptors. Individuals were sub-grouped based on a pre-determined threshold and via statistical cluster analysis. Two distinct subgroups were identified, increases in CSE following a-tDCS (i.e. Responders) and no increase or even reductions in CSE (i.e. Non-responders). No changes in ICI or ICF were reported. No relationships were reported between genetic polymorphisms in excitatory receptor genes and a-tDCS responders. An association was reported between a-tDCS responders and GABRA3 gene polymorphisms encoding for GABA-A receptors suggesting potential relationships between GABA-A receptor variations and capacity to undergo tDCS-induced cortical plasticity. In the largest tDCS study of its kind, this study presents an important step forward in determining the contribution genetic factors play in previously observed inter-individual variability to tDCS.

A Checklist to Reduce Response Variability in Studies Using Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Assessment of Corticospinal Excitability: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Response variability between individuals (interindividual variability) and within individuals (intraindividual variability) is an important issue in the transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) literature. This has raised questions of the validity of TMS to assess changes in corticospinal excitability (CSE) in a predictable and reliable manner. Several participant-specific factors contribute to this observed response variability with a current lack of consensus on the degree each factor contributes. This highlights a need for consistency and structure in reporting study designs and methodologies. Currently, there is no summarized review of the participant-specific factors that can be controlled and may contribute to response variability. This systematic review aimed to develop a checklist of methodological measures taken by previously published research to increase the homogeneity of participant selection criteria, preparation of participants before experimental testing, participant scheduling, and the instructions given to participants throughout experimental testing to minimize their effect on response variability. Seven databases were searched in full. Studies were included if CSE was measured via TMS and included methodological measures to increase the homogeneity of the participants. Eighty-four studies were included. Twenty-three included measures to increase participant selection homogeneity, 21 included measures to increase participant preparation homogeneity, while 61 included measures to increase participant scheduling and instructions during experimental testing homogeneity. These methodological measures were summarized into a user-friendly checklist with considerations, suggestions, and rationale/justification for their inclusion. This may provide the framework for further insights into ways to reduce response variability in TMS research.

The Effect of Unihemispheric Concurrent Dual-Site Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation of Primary Motor and Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortices on Motor Function in Patients With Sub-Acute Stroke

It is believed that unihemispheric concurrent dual-site transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS_UHCDS) of the primary motor cortex (M1) and the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) causes an increase in motor cortex excitability. However, the clinical effect of this type of stimulation on patients with neurological conditions is not yet known. The aim of the present study was to assess the effect of anodal-tDCS_UHCDS (a-tDCS_UHCDS) on upper limb motor function in subacute stroke patients. Fifteen patients participated in this sham-controlled crossover study. The main outcome measures were the reaction time (RT) to visual stimuli, completion time of a nine-pin pegboard (9-PPB), and the scores from the Fugl–Meyer assessment (FMA) for the upper limb of the involved side before and after three brain stimulation conditions. For a-tDCS_UHCDS, the anodal electrodes were placed on the M1 and the DLPFC, while for a-tDCS, the anodal electrode was placed on the M1. For the sham stimulation, the tDCS was turned off after 30 s. For brain stimulation, the selected current was 1 mA for 20 min. After a-tDCS_UHCDS, there was a significant reduction in the RT and completion time of the 9-PPB compared with the times after a-tDCS and the sham stimulation: p = 0.013 and p = 0.022, respectively). However, there was no significant difference in the FMA scores after the three types of stimulations (p = 0.085). Compared with a-tDCS, a-tDCS_UHCDS temporarily improved the RT and dexterity of the involved hand in subacute stroke patients.

Clinical Trial Registration: Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (IRCT), identifier IRCT2015012520787N1.

The effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on short-interval intracortical inhibition and intracortical facilitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is increasingly being used to affect the neurological conditions with deficient intracortical synaptic activities (i.e. Parkinson’s disease and epilepsy). In addition, it is suggested that the lasting effects of tDCS on corticospinal excitability (CSE) have intracortical origin. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine whether tDCS has any effect on intracortical circuits. Eleven electronic databases were searched for the studies investigating intracortical changes induced by anodal (a) and cathodal (c) tDCS, in healthy individuals, using two paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) paradigms: short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) and intracortical facilitation (ICF). Additionally, motor-evoked potential (MEP) size alterations, assessed by single-pulse TMS, were extracted from these studies to investigate the probable intracortical origin of tDCS effects on CSE. The methodological quality of included studies was examined using Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) and Downs and Black’s (D&B) assessment tools. Thirteen research papers, including 24 experiments, were included in this study scoring good and medium quality in PEDro and D&B scales, respectively. Immediately following anodal tDCS (a-tDCS) applications, we found significant decreases in SICI, but increases in ICF and MEP size. However, ICF and MEP size significantly decreased, and SICI increased immediately following cathodal tDCS (c-tDCS). The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis reveal that a-tDCS changes intracortical activities (SICI and ICF) toward facilitation, whereas c-tDCS alters them toward inhibition. It can also be concluded that increases and decreases in CSE after tDCS application are associated with corresponding changes in intracortical activities. The results suggest that tDCS can be clinically useful to modulate intracortical circuits.