Modulatory effects of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation on perception and pain thresholds in healthy volunteers

Modulation of pain perception through transcranial alternating current stimulation and its nonlinear relationship with the simulated electric field magnitude

BACKGROUND

Oscillatory activities observed in multiple regions are closely associated with the experience of pain. Specifically, oscillatory activities within the theta- and beta-frequency bands, observed in the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), have been implicated in pain perception among healthy individuals and those with chronic pain. However, their physiological significance remains unclear.

METHODS

We explored the modulation of pain perception in healthy individuals by theta- and beta-band transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) over the left DLPFC and examined the relationship between the modulation effect and magnitude of the electric field elicited by tACS in the left DLPFC using computational simulation.

RESULTS

Our findings revealed that both theta- and beta-tACS increased the heat pain threshold during and after stimulation. Notably, the simulated electric field magnitude in the left DLPFC exhibited an inverted U-shaped relationship with the pain modulation effect for theta-tACS.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study findings suggested that there would be an optimal electric field strength to produce a high analgesic effect for theta-tACS.

SIGNIFICANCE

The application of theta- and beta-tACS interventions targeting the left DLPFC might facilitate the treatment of chronic pain. Furthermore, the attainment of effective pain modulation via theta-tACS over the DLPFC warrants the use of optimal stimulus intensity.

Comparative Neurological and Behavioral Assessment of Central and Peripheral Stimulation Technologies for Induced Pain and Cognitive Tasks

Pain is a multifaceted, multisystem disorder that adversely affects neuro-psychological processes. This study compares the effectiveness of central stimulation (transcranial direct current stimulation-tDCS over F3/F4) and peripheral stimulation (transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation-TENS over the median nerve) in pain inhibition during a cognitive task in healthy volunteers and to observe potential neuro-cognitive improvements. Eighty healthy participants underwent a comprehensive experimental protocol, including cognitive assessments, the Cold Pressor Test (CPT) for pain induction, and tDCS/TENS administration. EEG recordings were conducted pre- and post-intervention across all conditions. The protocol for this study was categorized into four groups: G1 (control), G2 (TENS), G3 (anodal-tDCS), and G4 (cathodal-tDCS). Paired t-tests (p < 0.05) were conducted to compare Pre-Stage, Post-Stage, and neuromodulation conditions, with t-values providing insights into effect magnitudes. The result showed a reduction in pain intensity with TENS (p = 0.002, t-value = -5.34) and cathodal-tDCS (p = 0.023, t-value = -5.08) and increased pain tolerance with TENS (p = 0.009, t-value = 4.98) and cathodal-tDCS (p = 0.001, t-value = 5.78). Anodal-tDCS (p = 0.041, t-value = 4.86) improved cognitive performance. The EEG analysis revealed distinct neural oscillatory patterns across the groups. Specifically, G2 and G4 showed delta-power reductions, while G3 observed an increase. Moreover, G2 exhibited increased theta-power in the occipital region during CPT and Post-Stages. In the alpha-band, G2, G3, and G4 had reductions Post-Stage, while G1 and G3 increased. Additionally, beta-power increased in the frontal region for G2 and G3, contrasting with a reduction in G4. Furthermore, gamma-power globally increased during CPT1, with G1, G2, and G3 showing reductions Post-Stage, while G4 displayed a global decrease. The findings confirm the efficacy of TENS and tDCS as possible non-drug therapeutic alternatives for cognition with alleviation from pain.

A novel theta-controlled vibrotactile brain-computer interface to treat chronic pain: a pilot study

Limitations in chronic pain therapies necessitate novel interventions that are effective, accessible, and safe. Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) provide a promising modality for targeting neuropathology underlying chronic pain by converting recorded neural activity into perceivable outputs. Recent evidence suggests that increased frontal theta power (4-7 Hz) reflects pain relief from chronic and acute pain. Further studies have suggested that vibrotactile stimulation decreases pain intensity in experimental and clinical models. This longitudinal, non-randomized, open-label pilot study's objective was to reinforce frontal theta activity in six patients with chronic upper extremity pain using a novel vibrotactile neurofeedback BCI system. Patients increased their BCI performance, reflecting thought-driven control of neurofeedback, and showed a significant decrease in pain severity (1.29 ± 0.25 MAD, p = 0.03, q = 0.05) and pain interference (1.79 ± 1.10 MAD p = 0.03, q = 0.05) scores without any adverse events. Pain relief significantly correlated with frontal theta modulation. These findings highlight the potential of BCI-mediated cortico-sensory coupling of frontal theta with vibrotactile stimulation for alleviating chronic pain.

Efficacy of Home-Based Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Over the Primary Motor Cortex and Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex in the Disability Due to Pain in Fibromyalgia: A Factorial Sham-Randomized Clinical Study

This randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial compared the effectiveness of home-based-(HB) active transcranial direct current stimulation (a-tDCS) over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (l-DLPFC) or primary motor cortex (M1) with their respective sham-(s)-tDCS to determine whether a-tDCS would be more effective than s-tDCS in reducing pain and improving disability due to pain. The study included 102 patients with fibromyalgia aged 30 to 65 years old randomly assigned to 1 of 4 tDCS groups using a ratio of 2:1:2:1. The groups included l-DLPFC (a-tDCS, n = 34) and (s-tDCS, n = 17), or tDCS on the M1 (a-tDCS, n = 34) or (s-tDCS, n = 17). Patients self-administered 20 sessions of tDCS, with 2 mA for 20 minutes each day under remote supervision after in-person training. The Mixed Model for Repeated Measurements revealed that a-tDCS on DLPFC significantly reduced pain scores by 36.53% compared to 25.79% in s-tDCS. From baseline to the fourth week of treatment, a-tDCS on M1 reduced pain scores by 45.89% compared to 22.92% over s-tDCS. A generalized linear model showed a significant improvement in the disability scale in the groups that received a-tDCS compared to s-tDCS over M1 20.54% versus 2.49% (χ2 = 11.06, df = 1, P < .001]), while on DLPFC the improvement was 14.29% and 5.77%, with a borderline significance (χ2 = 3.19, df = 1, P = .06]), respectively. A higher reduction in serum brain-derived neurotrophic factor from baseline to treatment end was positively correlated with decreased pain scores regardless of the treatment group. The application of a-tDCS over M1 increased the heat pain threshold and the function of the descending pain inhibitory system. PERSPECTIVE: These findings provide important insights: (1) HB-tDCS has effectively reduced pain scores and improved disability due to fibromyalgia. (2) The study provides evidence that HB-a-tDCS is a viable and effective therapeutic approach. (3) HB-a-tDCS over M1 improved the function of the descending pain inhibitory system and increased the heat pain threshold. Finally, our findings also emphasize that brain-derived neurotrophic factor, as an index of neuroplasticity, may serve as a valuable marker associated with changes in clinical pain measures. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Number NCT03843203.

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Orthopedic Pain: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

(1) Background: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) appears to alleviate chronic pain via a brain-down mechanism. Although several review studies have examined the effects of tDCS on patients with chronic pain, no systematic review or meta-analysis has comprehensively analyzed the effects of tDCS on chronic orthopedic joint pain in one study. We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of tDCS for pain reduction in chronic orthopedic patients; (2) Methods: A comprehensive search of five electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Cochrane) was performed. Only randomized controlled trials that compared tDCS with a control intervention were included. Eighteen studies met our inclusion criteria. We identified four categories of chronic orthopedic pain: knee (k = 8), lower back (k = 7), shoulder (k = 2), and orofacial pain (k = 1). Random effect models were utilized, and a sensitivity analysis was conducted in the presence of significant heterogeneity. Studies within each pain condition were further classified according to the number of treatment sessions: 1-5 sessions, 6-10 sessions, and >10 sessions.; (3) Results: Significant reductions in chronic orthopedic joint pain were observed following tDCS compared to controls for knee (g = 0.59, p = 0.005), lower back (g = 1.14, p = 0.005), and shoulder (g = 1.17, p = 0.020). Subgroup analyses showed pain reductions after 6-10 tDCS sessions for knee pain and after 1-5 and >10 sessions for lower back pain; (4) Conclusions: tDCS could be considered a potential stand-alone or supplemental therapy for chronic knee and lower back pain. The effectiveness of tDCS treatment varies depending on the number of treatment sessions. Our findings suggest the importance of implementing individualized treatment plans when considering tDCS for chronic pain conditions.

Pain and Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation: A Bibliometric Analysis

Context

Pain management is a constant struggle. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a neuromodulation technique with proved efficacy in chronic pain.

Objective

The aim of the study is to provide a bibliometric perspective regarding articles on pain and tDCS. Having a visualized and systematically overview of publication trends, new research ideas could arise for clinicians.

Methods

Articles on pain and tDCS were retrieved from Web of Science database. Using the R software version 4.1.2 and the "biblioshiny" R package, a quantitative and statistical analysis was performed. Time trend, number of publications, journals and authors, author country and institution, as well as citations and references were visualized.

Results

A total of 554 publication fulfilled the criteria and were analyzed. The scientific production has been increasing over time with an annual growth of 17.1%. Brain Stimulation Journal and Journal of Pain are the leading journals regarding articles and citations. Fregni F. (83 articles) is the most prolific researcher with important authorship in the field. USA is the country with most authors involved in the topic (558 authors), whereas the leading institution is represented by Universidade Federal Rio Grande Do Sul (84 articles). Lefaucheur JP. article from 2017 has the maximum citations, while keywords in trend in the last three years are osteoarthritis and low back pain.

Conclusion

This is the first bibliometric study that reflects the trends of tDCS in the field of pain. Journals as well as authors are limited and clustered. However the number of articles as well as number of citations are constantly increasing, supporting the idea that this is an emerging topic. The information obtained could be an important practical basis for future pain management research.

Preemptive transcranial direct current stimulation induces analgesia, prevents chronic inflammation and fibrosis, and promotes tissue repair in a rat model of postoperative pain

This study evaluated the effects of previous exposure to Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) on nociceptive, neuroinflammatory, and neurochemical parameters, in rats subjected to an incisional pain model. Forty adult male Wistar rats (60 days old; weighing ∼ 250 g) were divided into five groups: 1. control (C); 2. drugs (D); 3. surgery (S); 4. surgery + sham-tDCS (SsT) and 5. surgery + tDCS (ST). Bimodal tDCS (0.5 mA) was applied for 20 min/day/8 days before the incisional model. Mechanical allodynia (von Frey) was evaluated at different time points after surgery. Cytokines and BDNF levels were evaluated in the cerebral cortex, hippocampus, brainstem, and spinal cord. Histology and activity of myeloperoxidase (MPO) and N-acetyl-β-D-glucosaminidase (NAGase) were evaluated in the surgical lesion sites in the right hind paw. The results demonstrate that the surgery procedure increased BDNF and IL-6 levels in the spinal cord levels in the hippocampus, and decreased IL-1β and IL-6 levels in the cerebral cortex, IL-6 levels in the hippocampus, and IL-10 levels in the brainstem and hippocampus. In addition, preemptive tDCS was effective in controlling postoperative pain, increasing BDNF, IL-6, and IL-10 levels in the spinal cord and brainstem, increasing IL-1β in the spinal cord, and decreasing IL-6 levels in the cerebral cortex and hippocampus, IL-1β and IL-10 levels in the hippocampus. Preemptive tDCS also contributes to tissue repair, preventing chronic inflammation, and consequent fibrosis. Thus, these findings imply that preemptive methods for postoperative pain management should be considered an interesting pain management strategy, and may contribute to the development of clinical applications for tDCS in surgical situations.

Modulation of vestibular input by short-term head-down bed rest affects somatosensory perception: implications for space missions

Introduction

On Earth, self-produced somatosensory stimuli are typically perceived as less intense than externally generated stimuli of the same intensity, a phenomenon referred to as somatosensory attenuation (SA). Although this phenomenon arises from the integration of multisensory signals, the specific contribution of the vestibular system and the sense of gravity to somatosensory cognition underlying distinction between self-generated and externally generated sensations remains largely unknown. Here, we investigated whether temporary modulation of the gravitational input by head-down tilt bed rest (HDBR)-a well-known Earth-based analog of microgravity-might significantly affect somatosensory perception of self- and externally generated stimuli.

Methods

In this study, 40 healthy participants were tested using short-term HDBR. Participants received a total of 40 non-painful self- and others generated electrical stimuli (20 self- and 20 other-generated stimuli) in an upright and HDBR position while blindfolded. After each stimulus, they were asked to rate the perceived intensity of the stimulation on a Likert scale.

Results

Somatosensory stimulations were perceived as significantly less intense during HDBR compared to upright position, regardless of the agent administering the stimulus. In addition, the magnitude of SA in upright position was negatively correlated with the participants' somatosensory threshold. Based on the direction of SA in the upright position, participants were divided in two subgroups. In the subgroup experiencing SA, the intensity rating of stimulations generated by others decreased significantly during HDBR, leading to the disappearance of the phenomenon of SA. In the second subgroup, on the other hand, reversed SA was not affected by HDBR.

Conclusion

Modulation of the gravitational input by HDBR produced underestimation of somatosensory stimuli. Furthermore, in participants experiencing SA, the reduction of vestibular inputs by HDBR led to the disappearance of the SA phenomenon. These findings provide new insights into the role of the gravitational input in somatosensory perception and have important implications for astronauts who are exposed to weightlessness during space missions.

Disturbing the activity of the primary motor cortex by means of transcranial magnetic stimulation affects long term memory of sentences referred to manipulable objects

Introduction

Previous studies on embodied meaning suggest that simulations in the motor cortex play a crucial role in the processing of action sentences. However, there is little evidence that embodied meaning have functional impact beyond working memory. This study examines how the neuromodulation of the motor cortex (M1) could affect the processing of action-related language, measuring participants' performance in a long-term memory task.

Method

Participants were submitted to two sessions in separate days, one with low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and the other with sham rTMS. The pulses were delivered for 15 minutes over M1 or over V1, used as a control area. After each stimulation or sham period, the participants were asked to memorize a list of simple sentences, with a manual action verb or an attentional verb, followed in both cases by a noun referred to a manipulable object (e.g., to hang a cane vs. to observe a cane). Finally, they received the verbs as cues with instructions to recall the nouns.

Results

The results showed that low frequency rTMS on M1, compared to sham stimulation, significantly improved the performance in the memory task, for both types of sentences. No change in performance was found after the rTMS stimulation of V1.

Discussion

These results confirm that the perturbation on the motor system, affect the memory of manipulable object names in the context of sentences, providing further evidence of the role played by the sensorimotor system in the encoding and recall of concrete sentences of action.

The effects of high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation on pain modulation and stress-induced hyperalgesia

Background

The dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) has been implicated in the modulation of pain-related signals. Given this involvement, manipulation of the DLPFC through transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) may influence internal pain modulation and decrease pain sensitivity. Acute stress is also thought to affect pain, with increased pain sensitivity observed following the presentation of an acute stressor.

Methods

A total of 40 healthy adults (50% male), ranging in age from 19 to 28 years (M = 22.13, SD = 1.92), were randomly allocated to one of two stimulation conditions (active and sham). High-definition tDCS (HD-tDCS) was applied for 10 min at 2 mA, with the anode placed over the left DLPFC. Stress was induced after HD-tDCS administration using a modified version of the Trier Social Stress Test. Pain modulation and sensitivity were assessed through the conditioned pain modulation paradigm and pressure pain threshold measurements, respectively.

Results

Compared to sham stimulation, active stimulation produced a significant increase in pain modulation capacity. No significant change in pain sensitivity and stress-induced hyperalgesia was observed following active tDCS.

Conclusion

This research shows novel evidence that anodal HD-tDCS over the DLPFC significantly enhances pain modulation. However, HD-tDCS had no effect on pain sensitivity or stress-induced hyperalgesia. The observed effect on pain modulation after a single dose of HD-tDCS over the DLPFC is a novel finding that informs further research into the utility of HD-tDCS in the treatment of chronic pain by presenting the DLPFC as an alternative target site for tDCS-induced analgesia.

Noninvasive Brain Stimulation for Cancer Pain Management in Nonbrain Malignancy: A Meta-Analysis

Purpose. Noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) has been reported to have analgesic effects on fibromyalgia and chronic neuropathic pain; however, its effects on cancer pain have yet to be determined. The present study aimed to evaluate the effects of NIBS on patients with pain secondary to nonbrain malignancy. Methods. Electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched from inception through June 5th, 2022. Parallel, randomized, placebo-controlled studies were included that enrolled adult patients with cancer pain, except for that caused by brain tumors, compared NIBS with placebo stimulation, and reported sufficient data for performing meta-analysis. Results. Four parallel, randomized, sham-controlled studies were included: two of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), one of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), and one of cranial electrical stimulation (CES). rTMS significantly improved pain in the subgroup analysis (standardized mean difference (SMD): −1.148, 95% confidence interval (CI): −1.660 to −0.637, ( $p<0.001$ )), while NIBS was not benefited in reducing pain intensity (SMD: −0.632, 95% CI: −1.356 to 0.092, p = 0.087). Also, NIBS significantly improved depressive symptoms (SMD: −0.665, 95% CI: −1.178 to −0.153, p = 0.011), especially in the form of rTMS (SMD: −0.875, 95% CI: −1.356 to −0.395, $p<0.001$ ) and tDCS (SMD: −1.082, 95% CI: −1.746 to −0.418, p = 0.001). Conclusion. rTMS significantly improved pain secondary to nonbrain malignancy apart from other forms of NIBS without major adverse events.

Transcranial random noise stimulation over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex attenuates pain expectation and perception

OBJECTIVE

The dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) has been increasingly used as a neuromodulatory target in pain management. Transcranial random noise stimulation (tRNS) was shown to effectively elevate cortical excitability. Hence, this study aimed to characterize how tRNS over the left DLPFC affects pain expectation and perception, as well as the efficacy of conditioned-pain modulation (CPM) that reflects the function of the endogenous pain-inhibitory pathway.

METHODS

Using a randomized, double-blinded, and sham-controlled design, healthy participants were randomly recruited to receive tRNS with a direct current offset or sham stimulation. Their expectations and perceptions of painful electrocutaneous stimuli, as well as CPM efficacy were assessed before, immediately after, and 30 min after tRNS.

RESULTS

Compared with sham stimulation, perceived-pain ratings to the painful stimuli, and expected-pain ratings before painful stimuli, attenuated immediately after tRNS, whereas this analgesic effect was ineffective 30 min after tRNS. Importantly, the immediate analgesia induced by tRNS could be accounted for by tRNS effect on attenuating expected-pain ratings before certain painful stimuli. However, CPM efficacy was not significantly affected by tRNS.

CONCLUSIONS

These results demonstrate analgesia immediately after applying tRNS over the left DLPFC.

SIGNIFICANCE

This study provides evidence for analgesia of DLPFC-tRNS on an experimental pain model.

Multifocal tDCS Targeting the Motor Network Modulates Event-Related Cortical Responses During Prolonged Pain

Multifocal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) targeting several brain regions is promising for inducing cortical plasticity. It remains unknown whether multifocal tDCS aimed at the resting-state motor network (network-tDCS) can revert N2-P2 cortical responses otherwise attenuated during prolonged experimental pain. Thirty-eight healthy subjects participated in 2 sessions separated by 24 hours (Day1, Day2) of active (n = 19) or sham (n = 19) network-tDCS. Experimental pain induced by topical capsaicin was maintained for 24 hours and assessed using a numerical rating scale. Electrical detection and pain thresholds, and N2-P2 evoked potentials (electroencephalography) to noxious electrical stimulation were recorded before capsaicin-induced pain (Day1-baseline), after capsaicin application (Day1-post-cap), and after 2 sessions of network-tDCS (Day2). Capsaicin induced moderate pain at Day1-post-cap, which further increased at Day2 in both groups (P = .01). Electrical detection/pain thresholds did not change over time. N2-P2 responses were reduced on Day1-post-cap compared to Day1-baseline (P = .019). At Day2 compared with Day1-post-cap, N2-P2 responses were significantly higher in the Active network-tDCS group (P<.05), while the sham group remained inhibited. These results suggest that tDCS targeting regions associated with the motor network may modulate the late evoked brain responses to noxious peripheral stimulation otherwise initially inhibited by capsaicin-induced pain. PERSPECTIVE: This study extends the evidence of N2-P2 reduction due to capsaicin-induced pain from 30 minutes to 24 hrs. Moreover, 2 sessions of tDCS targeting the motor network in the early stage of nociceptive pain may revert the inhibition of N2-P2 associated with capsaicin-induced pain.

Transcranial direct current stimulation combined with peripheral stimulation in chronic pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The combination of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) with peripheral stimulation may optimize their effects and bring positive results in treatment of people with chronic pain.

AREAS COVERED

A systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized and non-randomized trials was performed to investigate the combination of tDCS with peripheral stimulation in adults with chronic pain. The primary outcome was pain intensity. Six studies were included in this review (sample of 228 participants), which investigated the combination of tDCS and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, peripheral electrical stimulation, breathing-controlled electrical stimulation and intramuscular electrical stimulation. The conditions studied were knee osteoarthritis, spinal cord injury, chronic low back pain, and neurogenic pain of the arms. Pain intensity, measured by visual analog scale or numerical rating scale, was reduced in all included studies when at least one of the interventions was active, regardless they were combined or alone, with or without tDCS. However, meta-analysis showed superiority of tDCS used in combination with peripheral stimulation.

EXPERT OPINION

This systematic review and meta-analysis suggests positive effects of tDCS combined with peripheral stimulation in chronic pain conditions. However, the evidence of the primary outcome was classified as low quality due to the limited number of studies.

Altered anterior insula functional connectivity in adolescent and young women with endometriosis-associated pain: Pilot resting-state fMRI study

BACKGROUND

Endometriosis is the leading cause of chronic pelvic pain. Alterations in brain functional connectivity have been reported in adult women with endometriosis-associated pain (EAP), however, it is still unknown if similar patterns of changes exist in adolescents.

METHODS

In this pilot study, resting-state fMRI scans were obtained from 11 adolescent and young women with EAP and 14 healthy female controls. Using a seed-to-voxel approach, we investigated functional connectivity between the anterior insula, medial prefrontal cortex, and the rest of the brain. Furthermore, we explored whether potential functional connectivity differences were correlated with clinical characteristics including disease duration, pain intensity, and different psychosocial factors (pain catastrophizing, fear of pain, functional disability, anxiety, and depression).

RESULTS

Our findings revealed that patients with EAP demonstrated significantly decreased connectivity between the right anterior insula and two clusters: one in the right cerebellum, and one in the left middle frontal gyrus compared to controls. Additionally, functional connectivity between the right anterior insula and the right cerebellum was positively associated with pain intensity levels. In patients with EAP, brain changes were also correlated with state anxiety and fear of pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results are relevant not only for understanding the brain characteristics underlying EAP at a younger age, but also in enhancing future pain treatment efforts by supporting the involvement of the central nervous system in endometriosis.

Single Session Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Different Cortical Areas

Abstract. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) studies in healthy volunteers have shown conflicting results in terms of modulation in pain thresholds. The aim of this study was to investigate how single session anodal tDCS and modulated tDCS (mtDCS) of distinct cortical areas affected pain and perception thresholds in healthy participants. Five different stimulation conditions were applied at different cortical sites to 20 healthy volunteers to investigate the effects of tDCS and mtDCS (20 Hz) on pain and perception thresholds. TDCS over the motor cortex (M1), mtDCS over the motor cortex, tDCS over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), mtDCS of the DLPFC, and mtDCS over the occipital cortex were the stimulation conditions. All of the stimulations were anodal. The stimulations were given in a randomized order at 20-minute intervals. For comparison, electrical pain and perception thresholds were obtained from the right middle finger before and during the tDCS. After each measurement, participants were asked to give a score to their pain. In repeated measures analysis of variance (RM-ANOVA) test, the Condition × Time interaction showed no significant influence on changes in pain, perception thresholds, and pain scores ( p = .48, p = .89, and p = .50, respectively). However, regardless of the condition types, there was a significant difference in pain and perceptual thresholds during tDCS ( p = .01, p = .025, respectively). Our findings did not support difference in pain and perception modulation by a single session anodal tDCS over M1 and DLPFC compared to the occipital cortex in healthy volunteers. The increase in all thresholds during tDCS, irrespective of conditions, and peripheral sensations, including an active control group, taken together, suggest a placebo effect of active tDCS. Future studies about pain and perception in healthy subjects should consider the level of experimental pain and a strong placebo effect.

Effects of Preceding Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Movement Velocity and EMG Signal during the Back Squat Exercise

This study aimed to evaluate the effects of preceding anodal transcranial direct stimulation (a-tDCS) over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) during the back squat exercise on movement velocity and surface electromyographic (sEMG) activity. Thirteen healthy, well-trained, male firefighters (34.72 ± 3.33 years; 178 ± 7.61 cm; 76.85 ± 11.21 kg; 26.8 ± 4.2 kg·m−2; back squat 1-repetition maximum 141.5 ± 16.3 kg) completed this randomised double-blinded sham-controlled crossover study. After familiarisation and basal measurements, participants attended the laboratory on two occasions separated by 72 h to receive either Sham or a-tDCS (current intensity of 2 mA for 20 min). Immediately after stimulation, participants completed three sets of 12 repetitions (70% of 1-RM) with three minutes of recovery between sets monitored with a linear position transducer. The sEMG of the rectus femoris (RF) and vastus lateralis (VL) of both legs were recorded. No significant differences were observed between a-tDCS and Sham interventions on mean concentric velocity at any set (p > 0.05). Velocity loss and effort index were significantly higher (p < 0.05) in set 3 compared to set 1 only in the a-tDCS group. The right-leg RM and right-leg VL elicited the greatest muscle activation during set 1 after a-tDCS and Sham, respectively (p < 0.05). Our results revealed that a-tDCS over the DLPFC might impact movement velocity or fatigue tolerance in well-trained individuals. Notwithstanding, significant differences in dominant-leg muscle activity were found both in a-tDCS and Sham.

Active and sham transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) improved quality of life in female patients with fibromyalgia

PURPOSE

Fibromyalgia (FM) is a chronic pain syndrome with a strong impact on quality of life (QoL). Treatment of this condition remains a challenge, due to the scarce evidence for the effectiveness of the therapeutic approaches available. Current attention is focused on transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), which has yielded promising results for pain treatment. Rather than focusing only on pain relief, in this study, we aimed to determine how active or sham tDCS (over three cortical targets -the primary motor cortex, the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and the operculo-insular cortex-) affect QoL in patients with FM.

METHODS

Using a double-blind, placebo-controlled design, we applied fifteen tDCS sessions of 20' to initial 130 participants (randomized to any of the four treatment groups). We evaluated the QoL (assessed by SF-36) and the symptoms' impact (assessed by FIQ-R) in baseline, after treatment and at 6 months follow-up.

RESULTS

All groups were comparable as regards age, medication pattern and severity of symptoms before the treatment. We found that QoL and symptoms' impact improved in all treatment groups (including the sham) and this improvement lasted for up to 6 months. However, we did not observe any group effect nor group*treatment interaction.

CONCLUSIONS

After the intervention, we observed a non-specific effect that may be due to placebo, favoured by the expectations of tDCS efficacy and psychosocial variables inherent to the intervention (daily relationship with therapists and other patients in the clinic). Therefore, active tDCS is not superior to sham stimulation in improving QoL in FM.

Neuromodulation of somatosensory pain thresholds of the neck musculature using a novel transcranial direct current stimulation montage: a randomized double-blind, sham controlled study

OBJECTIVES

Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of primary motor cortex (M1) and cathodal of the primary sensory cortex (S1) have previously shown to modulate the sensory thresholds when administered with the reference electrode located over the contralateral supraorbital area (SO). Combining the two stimulation paradigms into one with simultaneous stimulation of the two brain areas (M1 + S1 - tDCS) may result in a synergistic effect inducing a prominent neuromodulation, noticeable in the pain thresholds. The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy of the novel M1 + S1 - tDCS montage compared to sham-stimulation in modulating the pain thresholds in healthy adults.

METHODS

Thirty-nine (20 males) subjects were randomly assigned to either receiving 20 min. active M1 + S1 - tDCS or sham tDCS in a double-blinded single session study. Thermal and mechanical pain thresholds were assessed before and after the intervention.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in the pain thresholds within either group, or between the M1 + S1 - tDCS group and the Sham-tDCS group (p>0.05), indicating that the intervention was ineffective in inducing a neuromodulation of the somatosensory system.

CONCLUSIONS

Experimental investigations of novel tDCS electrode montages, that are scientifically based on existing studies or computational modelling, are essential to establish better tDCS protocols. Here simultaneous transcranial direct current stimulation of the primary motor cortex and primary sensory cortex showed no effect on the pain thresholds of the neck musculature in healthy subjects. This tDCS montage may have been ineffective due to how the electrical field reaches the targeted neurons, or may have been limited by the design of a single tDCS administration. The study adds to the existing literature of the studies investigating effects of new tDCS montages with the aim of establishing novel non-invasive brain stimulation interventions for chronic neck pain rehabilitation. North Denmark Region Committee on Health Research Ethics (VN-20180085) ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04658485).

Transcranial direct current stimulation of 3 cortical targets is no more effective than placebo as treatment for fibromyalgia: a double-blind sham-controlled clinical trial

ABSTRACT

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the primary motor cortex (M1) and the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex seem to improve pain and other symptoms of fibromyalgia (FM), although the evidence on the effectiveness of tDCS and the optimal stimulation target is not robust enough. Our main objective was to establish the optimal area of stimulation, comparing the 2 classical targets and a novel pain-related area, the operculo-insular cortex, in a sham-controlled trial. Using a double-blind design, we randomly assigned 130 women with FM to 4 treatment groups (M1, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, operculo-insular cortex, and sham), each receiving fifteen 20-minute sessions of 2 mA anodal tDCS over the left hemisphere. Our primary outcome was pain intensity. The secondary outcomes were the other core symptoms of FM (fatigue, mood, cognitive and sleep disorders, and hyperalgesia measured by the pressure pain threshold). We performed the assessment at 3 time points (before, immediately after treatment, and at 6 months follow-up). The linear mixed-model analysis of variances showed significant treatment effects across time for clinical pain and for fatigue, cognitive and sleep disturbances, and experimental pain, irrespective of the group. In mood, the 3 active tDCS groups showed a significantly larger improvement in anxiety and depression than sham. Our findings provide evidence of a placebo effect, support the use of tDCS for the treatment of affective symptoms, and challenge the effectiveness of tDCS as treatment of FM.

A systematic examination of the neural correlates of subjective time perception with fMRI and tDCS

The ability to keep track of time is one of the fundamental human behaviours that enhance survival in the wild. It is still an essential skill that enables an individual to function well in modern society. In the present study, we tested the attentional gate model, one of the most common conceptual frameworks in studies of subjective time perception. Its utility has been well established, but it has been criticised for its lack of neurophysiological support; few studies attempted to systematically identify its components and their neural correlates. Previous studies established that the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) was associated with working memory tasks and a correlation between activity in the cerebellum and the timing of tasks. An fMRI study was conducted to confirm that these two cortical regions were activated during the execution of a new time discrimination task that considers individual variations in subjective time perception. Simulations were conducted to optimize the electrode placement in order to maximize the electric fields of tDCS perturbation to these two areas. According to the attentional gate model, hypotheses about tDCS perturbation to subjective time perception, attention and working memory were formulated and tested. Attention and working memory were measured by the attention network and N-back tasks. There are weak effects to the perceived subjective equivalent and the reaction time in the attention network task, but both are not statistically significant after correction for multiple comparisons. Exploration analyses show a link between attention and subjective time perception after tDCS perturbation. To conclude, the results do not support the attentional gate model, but show a linkage between attention and subjective time perception in terms of similar neural circuits and their relationships under certain circumstances.

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation of Motor Cortex Enhances Spike Performances of Professional Female Volleyball Players

The purpose of this study was to investigate effects of brain excitability by transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on spike performances of professional female volleyball players. Thirteen professional female volleyball players were recruited for participation. We performed a randomized single-blind, SHAM-stimulus controlled, and counter-balanced crossover design with two interventions in this study. An anodal tDCS current was applied over the primary motor cortex (M1) for 20 min at 2 mA. In the SHAM intervention, the current was first applied for 30 s, after which it was terminated. Exercise performance assessment which comprised spike performance (spike ball speed, spiking consistency), two vertical jumps (jump and reach: JaR, countermovement jump: CMJ), bench-press and back-squat one-repetition maximum (1RM) were tested pre- and post-intervention. Results indicated that spike ball speed and spiking consistency following tDCS were significantly higher than those after SHAM intervention (both p < 0.05). However, JaR and CMJ did not show any significant differences between tDCS and SHAM intervention groups (both p > 0.05). There was no significant difference in bench-press and back-squat 1RM between two groups either (both p > 0.05). These findings suggest that tDCS could be effective in enhancing motor coordination performances of professional female volleyball athletes.

Multichannel transcranial direct current stimulation over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex may modulate the induction of secondary hyperalgesia, a double-blinded cross-over study in healthy volunteers

Background

Central sensitization is thought to play a critical role in the development of chronic pain, and secondary mechanical hyperalgesia is considered one of its hall-mark features. Consequently, interventions capable of modulating its development could have important therapeutic value. Non-invasive neuromodulation of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) has shown potential to reduce pain, both in healthy volunteers and in patients. Whether it can modulate the induction of central sensitization, however, is less well known.

Objective

To determine whether multifocal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) targeting the left DLPFC affects the development of secondary mechanical hyperalgesia.

Methods

In this within-subjects, cross-over, double-blinded study, eighteen healthy volunteers participated in three experimental sessions. After 20 minutes of either anodal, cathodal, or sham multichannel tDCS over the left DLPFC, secondary mechanical hyperalgesia was induced using high-frequency electrical stimulation (HFS) of the volar forearm. We assessed intensity of perception to 128 mN mechanical pinprick stimuli at baseline and up to 240 minutes after HFS. We also mapped the area of mechanical hyperalgesia.

Results

HFS resulted in a robust and unilateral increase in the intensity of perception to mechanical pinprick stimuli at the HFS arm, which was not different between tDCS stimulation conditions. However, the area of hyperalgesia was reduced after anodal tDCS compared to sham.

Conclusion

Anodal tDCS over the left DLPFC modestly modulates the size of the HFS-induced area of secondary mechanical hyperalgesia, suggesting that non-invasive neuromodulation targeting the left DLPFC may be a potential intervention to limit the development of central sensitization.

Causal evidence of the roles of the prefrontal and occipital cortices in modulating the impact of color on moral judgement

Moral judgment is known to be affected by factors such as color. Previous research has shown that the colors black and white are particularly important, however, the neural mechanisms underlying this effect remain unclear. This study aimed to investigate the causal relationship between specific brain regions (left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, left DLPFC and occipital cortex, OC) and their impact of black and white moral judgement by using transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). The results of Experiment 1 (N = 54) and Experiment 2 (N = 66) showed that anodal tDCS over the left DLPFC inhibited the impact of black and white on moral judgment while cathodal tDCS over the left DLPFC enhanced the effect. Conversely, anodal tDCS over the OC enhanced the impact of white on moral judgment, while cathodal tDCS over the OC inhibited it. Together these results suggest that moral judgment relies not only on the cognitive control network, but also brain regions important for sensory perception. The current findings provide enhanced insight into how colors can impact moral judgments.

Effects of non-invasive brain stimulation in multiple sclerosis: systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective:

The objective of this meta-analysis was to summarize evidence on the therapeutic effects of non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) on core symptoms of multiple sclerosis (MS). Specifically, findings from studies deploying transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) protocols were summarized in this review.

Methods:

We systematically searched articles published in four databases, until 31 May 2021, which compared the effects of active tDCS or rTMS with sham intervention in MS patients. We used a random-effects model for this meta-analysis. Meta-regression and subgroup meta-analysis were used to examine the effects of stimulation dose and different stimulation protocols, respectively.

Results:

Twenty-five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in this review, consisting of 19 tDCS and 6 rTMS studies. tDCS led to a significant and immediate reduction of fatigue with a large effect size (Hedges’s g = −0.870, 95% confidence intervals (CI) = [−1.225 to −0.458], number needed to treat (NNT) = 2). Particularly, a subgroup analysis showed that applying tDCS over the left DLPFC and bilateral S1 led to fatigue reductions compared to sham stimulation. Furthermore, tDCS had favorable effects on fatigue in MS patients with low physical disability but not those with high physical disability, and additionally improved cognitive function. Finally, whereas rTMS was observed to reduce muscle spasticity, these NIBS protocols showed no further effect on MS-associated pain and mood symptoms.

Conclusion:

tDCS in MS alleviates fatigue and improves cognitive function whereas rTMS reduces muscle spasticity. More high-quality studies are needed to substantiate the therapeutic effects of different NIBS protocols in MS.

The effect of high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation on pain processing in a healthy population: A single-blinded crossover controlled study

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is increasingly used in pain treatment. tDCS targeting both primary motor cortex (M1) and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) may modulate the descending pain inhibitory system, however, it remains controversial regarding the optimal stimulation region for pain modulation. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the effects of high-definition anodic stimulation of M1 and DLPFC on conditioned pain modulation (CPM) and pain thresholds and establish a preferred stimulation setting. Twenty-six healthy adults were randomly assigned to M1-tDCS, DLPFC-tDCS, or sham-tDCS groups. During the three sessions, each participant received an active or sham stimulation of 2 mA for 20 min, with at least 3 days' interval between sessions. Quantitative sensory tests were performed to obtain pressure pain threshold (PPT), cold pain threshold (CPT), and CPM before and after the tDCS intervention. Only M1-tDCS significantly increased CPM in healthy individuals compared with sham control (P = 0.004). No statistically significant difference was found in PPT and CPT between tDCS vs. sham control (P > 0.05). Our findings further support the important role of M1 as a target in pain regulation. Further large-scale, multicenter studies in chronic pain populations are needed to validate the alterations of distinct target brain regions related to pain and thus for an optimal target stimulation strategy in pain management.

Effect of transcranial direct current brain stimulation of the motor cortex on chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting in female patients with breast cancer

OBJECTIVE

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a negative impact associated to chemotherapy and its management still challenging. This study aimed to research the additive impact of single-session tDCS (2 mA) over the motor cortex for 20 minutes before chemotherapy to antiemetic on CINV in female patients suffers from breast cancer who obtained highly emetogenic chemotherapy.

STUDY LAYOUT

Prospective randomized double-blind Sham-controlled study.

SETTING

Academic medical center.

METHOD

Sixty breast cancer patients prepared for chemotherapy treatment were selected and allocated randomly into two equal groups: a real and a sham group; tDCS became implemented over the primary motor area (M1) (2 mA) for 20 minutes. Patients' nausea was measured by cumulative index of nausea and visual analog scale for nausea (VAS-N), and vomiting by cumulative index of episodes of vomiting, and Edmonton symptoms Assessment Scale (ESAS) to assess symptoms like pain, malaise, and sense of well-being. Evaluation was done prestimulation and every 24 h for 72 h after end of infusion of chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Real tDCS group showed reduction of cumulative index of nausea (P < 0.001, F = 50), VAS-N (P < 0.001, F = 52) and for ESAS in malaise score (P < 0.001, F = 37.6) and sense of wellbeing score (P < 0.001, F = 25) than sham group. Six patients (20%) in the real group required rescue antiemtic therapy vs. 14 patients (46.7%) in the Sham group (P < 0.028).

CONCLUSION

Single session of real M1 tDCS could be suggested as an effective adjuvant maneuver in control of CINV in female patients suffers from breast cancer who obtained highly emetogenic chemotherapy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials.gov trial registry (identifier: NCT03405324).

The effect of transcranial direct current stimulation of dorsolateral prefrontal cortex on performing a sequential dual task: a randomized experimental study

When it comes to simultaneous processing of two tasks, information processing capacity is usually below par and not desirable. Therefore, this preliminary study aimed to investigate the effect of transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) of dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) on performing dual tasks. Twenty-six students (average age 25.2 ± 2.43 years) were selected and then randomly divided into experimental and sham groups. All of the participants conducted the Stroop effect test in a dual task situation before and after the tDCS. This test included two intervals between the stimuli of 100 and 900 ms. The results of mixed-ANOVA showed that the average second reaction time of the experimental stimulated group was reduced (in both dual tasks with congruent and incongruent stimuli) significantly after the tDCS. Therefore, it can be stated that the tDCS of the DLPFC increases the information processing speed and the capacity of attention and, as a result, decreases the effect of the psychological refractory period.

The residential stability mindset increases racial in-group bias in empathy

With the deepening of internationalization, the population's mobility has greatly increased, which can impact people's intergroup relationships. The current research examined the hypothesis that residential mobility plays a crucial role in racial in-group bias in empathy (RIBE) with three studies. By manipulating the residential mobility/stability mindset and measuring subjective pain intensity ratings (Study 1) and event-related potentials (ERPs, Study 2) of Chinese adults on painful and neutral expressions of Asian and Caucasian faces, we found that the RIBE in subjective ratings and N1 amplitudes increased and P3 amplitudes decreased in the stability group. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) manipulation in Study 3 further found that anodal stimulation of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) increased the RIBE of participants with residential stability experience but had no effect on those with residential mobility experience. As residential mobility continues to increase worldwide, we may observe concomitant changes in racial intergroup relationships.

Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Reduces Secondary Hyperalgesia Induced by low Frequency Electrical Stimulation in Healthy Volunteers

The aim of the study was to determine whether transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) reduced pain and signs of central sensitization induced by low frequency electrical stimulation in healthy volunteers. Thirty-nine participants received tDCS stimulation under 4 different conditions: anodal tDCS of the primary motor cortex (M1), anodal tDCS of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), anodal tDCS over M1 and DLPFC concurrently, and sham tDCS. Participants were blind to the tDCS condition. The order of the conditions was randomized among participants. Pain ratings to pinpricks, the current level that evoked moderate pain, and pain induced by low frequency electrical stimulation were assessed in the forearm by an experimenter who was blind to the tDCS conditions. Anodal tDCS at M1 increased the current level that evoked moderate pain compared to sham and other conditions. Anodal tDCS of DLPFC completely abolished secondary hyperalgesia. Unexpectedly, however, concurrent anodal tDCS over M1 and DLPFC did not reduce pain or hyperalgesia more than M1 alone or DLPFC alone. Overall, these findings suggest that anodal tDCS over M1 suppresses pain, and that anodal tDCS over DLPFC modulates secondary hyperalgesia (a sign of central sensitization) in healthy participants. PERSPECTIVE: Anodal transcranial current stimulation (atDCS) at the left motor cortex and the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex increased the electrically-evoked pain threshold and reduced secondary hyperalgesia in healthy participants. Replication of this study in chronic pain populations may open more avenues for chronic pain treatment.

Transcranial direct current stimulation reduces ischemia-induced sensory disturbance in the hands of healthy subjects

INTRODUCTION/AIMS

The treatment of entrapment neuropathies, such as carpal tunnel syndrome or cubital tunnel syndrome, has significant challenges that have yet to be solved. To a large extent, the success of the treatment of peripheral nerve damage is dependent on brain plasticity during the recovery process. Recently, noninvasive brain stimulation procedures, such as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), to modulate brain activity have been developed. This study aimed to determine whether tDCS can improve artificially induced ischemic sensory disturbances in the finger.

METHODS

Ten right-handed, healthy volunteers, with an average age of 25.5 years, participated in this study. A rubber bandage at the base of the right index finger was used to induce a regional sensory disturbance for 30 minutes. An anodal tDCS was applied over their left M1 area 15 minutes into the session. The current perception threshold (CPT) in the index and little finger pad was evaluated using the PainVision system and used as a measure of the sensory threshold.

RESULTS

In the index finger, the CPT increased significantly with time, a finding that was absent after tDCS application.

DISCUSSION

It has been reported that anodal tDCS over M1 primarily modulates the functional connectivity of sensory networks, and our findings demonstrate that it improved ischemia-induced sensory disturbances. Modulating the central nervous system using tDCS represents a potential avenue for treating entrapment neuropathies.

Analgesia induced by anodal tDCS and high-frequency tRNS over the motor cortex: Immediate and sustained effects on pain perception

BACKGROUND

Many studies have shown effects of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (a-tDCS) and high-frequency transcranial random noise stimulation (tRNS) on elevating cortical excitability. Moreover, tRNS with a direct current (DC)-offset is more likely to lead to increases in cortical excitability than solely tRNS. While a-tDCS over primary motor cortex (M1) has been shown to attenuate pain perception, tRNS + DC-offset may prove as an effective means for pain relief.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to examine effects of a-tDCS and high-frequency tRNS + DC-offset over M1 on pain expectation and perception, and assess whether these effects could be influenced by the certainty of pain expectation.

METHODS

Using a double-blinded and sham-controlled design, 150 healthy participants were recruited to receive a single-session a-tDCS, high-frequency tRNS + DC-offset, or sham stimulation over M1. The expectation and perception of electrical stimulation in certain and uncertain contexts were assessed at baseline, immediately after, and 30 min after stimulation.

RESULTS

Compared with sham stimulation, a-tDCS induced immediate analgesic effects that were greater when the stimulation outcome was expected with uncertainty; tRNS induced immediate and sustained analgesic effects that were mediated by decreasing pain expectation. Nevertheless, we found no strong evidence for tRNS being more effective for attenuating pain than a-tDCS.

CONCLUSIONS

The analgesic effects of a-tDCS and tRNS showed different temporal courses, which could be related to the more sustained effectiveness of high-frequency tRNS + DC-offset in elevating cortical excitability. Moreover, expectations of pain intensity should be taken into consideration to maximize the benefits of neuromodulation.

To Combine or Not to Combine Physical Therapy With tDCS for Stroke With Shoulder Pain? Analysis From a Combination Randomized Clinical Trial for Rehabilitation of Painful Shoulder in Stroke

Purpose: Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) is an intervention that seems to be an ideal tool to enhance the effects of rehabilitation therapies given it facilitates generation of plasticity in the stimulated brain area. In stroke this strategy has been highly utilized; however, the results have been mixed. In this trial we have evaluated the analgesic and functional effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) combined with physiotherapy in stroke survivors with shoulder pain.

Methods: Twenty-six stroke surviving adults with shoulder pain received 10 sessions of passive mobilization and performed upper limb exercises using a cycle ergometer, combined with active or sham tDCS. The intensity of pain in the hemiplegic shoulder was measured using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS); secondary outcomes were the level of motor impairment, handgrip strength, range of motion, motor function of the upper limbs, and quality of life (QOL) assessed before and after 10 sessions and 1 month after the end of the treatment.

Results: A clinically important pain reduction (3 points) was found in both groups and was maintained at follow-up; there was no significant difference between groups (p = 0.3). Similarly, the shoulder range of motion improved, motor function and quality of life improved showed no significant differences between groups. One result that needs to be underscored is that both groups had a significant effect size toward improvement in all of these outcomes.

Conclusions: We discuss in this study that tDCS is not a useful combination strategy when the physical therapy has a large effect by itself and we also review other negative trials of combined therapy under this framework of ceiling effect of the main physical therapy.

Trial registry: Trial registration: Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials, RBR-8F5MNY (http://www.ensaiosclinicos.gov.br/rg/RBR-8f5mny/). Registered on June 2, 2017.

Beginning of the recruitment of the volunteers: august, 2017.

Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on experimental pain perception: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Many studies have examined the effectiveness of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on human pain perception in both healthy populations and pain patients. Nevertheless, studies have yielded conflicting results, likely due to differences in stimulation parameters, experimental paradigms, and outcome measures. Human experimental pain models that utilize indices of pain in response to well-controlled noxious stimuli can avoid many confounds present in clinical data. This study aimed to assess the robustness of tDCS effects on experimental pain perception among healthy populations.

METHODS

We conducted three meta-analyses that analyzed tDCS effects on ratings of perceived pain intensity to suprathreshold noxious stimuli, pain threshold and tolerance.

RESULTS

The meta-analyses showed a statically significant tDCS effect on attenuating pain-intensity ratings to suprathreshold noxious stimuli. In contrast, tDCS effects on pain threshold and pain tolerance were statistically non-significant. Moderator analysis further suggested that stimulation parameters (active electrode size and current density) and experimental pain modality moderated the effectiveness of tDCS in attenuating pain-intensity ratings.

CONCLUSION

The effectiveness of tDCS on attenuating experimental pain perception depends on both stimulation parameters of tDCS and the modality of experimental pain.

SIGNIFICANCE

This study provides some theoretical basis for the application of tDCS in pain management.

Effect of anodal high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation on the pain sensitivity in a healthy population: a double-blind, sham-controlled study

ABSTRACT

High-definition transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS) of brain areas related to pain processing may provide analgesic effects evident in the sensory detection and pain thresholds. The somatosensory sensitivity was assessed after HD-tDCS targeting the primary motor cortex (M1) and/or the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). Eighty-one (40 females) subjects were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 anodal HD-tDCS protocols (20 minutes) applied on 3 consecutive days: Sham-tDCS, DLPFC-tDCS, M1-tDCS, and DLPFC&M1-tDCS (simultaneous transcranial direct current stimulation [tDCS] of DLPFC and M1). Subjects and experimenter were blinded to the tDCS protocols. The somatosensory sensitivity were assessed each day, before and after each tDCS by detection and pain thresholds to thermal and mechanical skin stimulation, vibration detection thresholds, and pressure pain thresholds. Subjects were effectively blinded to the protocol, with no significant difference in rates of whether they received real or placebo tDCS between the 4 groups. Compared with the Sham-tDCS, none of the active HD-tDCS protocols caused significant changes in detection or pain thresholds. Independent of tDCS protocols, pain and detection thresholds except vibration detection were increased immediately after the first tDCS protocol compared with baseline (P < 0.05). Overall, the active stimulation protocols were not able to induce significant modulation of the somatosensory thresholds in this healthy population compared with sham-tDCS. Unrelated to the HD-tDCS protocol, a decreased sensitivity was found after the first intervention, indicating a placebo effect or possible habituation to the quantitative sensory testing assessments. These findings add to the increasing literature of null findings in the modulatory effects of HD-tDCS on the healthy somatosensory system.

Noninvasive motor cortex stimulation effects on quantitative sensory testing in healthy and chronic pain subjects: a systematic review and meta-analysis

ABSTRACT

One of the potential mechanisms of motor cortex stimulation by noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) effects on pain is through the restoration of the defective endogenous inhibitory pain pathways. However, there are still limited data on quantitative sensory testing (QST), including conditioned pain modulation (CPM), supporting this mechanism. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of noninvasive motor cortex stimulation on pain perception as indexed by changes in QST outcomes. Database searches were conducted until July 2019 to include randomized controlled trials that performed sham-controlled NIBS on the motor cortex in either the healthy and/or pain population and assessed the QST and CPM. Quality of studies was assessed through the Cochrane tool. We calculated the Hedge's effect sizes of QST and CPM outcomes and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) and performed random-effects meta-analyses. Thirty-eight studies were included (1178 participants). We found significant increases of pain threshold in healthy subjects (ES = 0.16, 95% CI = 0.02-0.31, I2 = 22.2%) and pain populations (ES = 0.48, 95% CI = 0.15-0.80, I2 = 68.8%), and homogeneous higher CPM effect (pain ratings reduction) in healthy subjects (ES = -0.39, 95% CI = -0.64 to -0.14, I2 = 17%) and pain populations (ES = -0.35, 95% CI = -0.60 to -0.11, I2 = 0%) in the active NIBS group compared with sham. These results support the idea of top-down modulation of endogenous pain pathways by motor cortex stimulation as one of the main mechanisms of pain reduction assessed by QST, which could be a useful predictive and prognostic biomarker for chronic pain personalized treatment with NIBS.

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.

The effect of tDCS applied to the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex on cycling performance and the modulation of exercise induced pain

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a neuromodulatory tool purported to enhance endurance performance through reducing fatigue related perceptions, including exercise-induced pain (EIP). We examined whether tDCS of the left DLPFC (1) can reduce EIP during a fixed intensity cycling trial (FI), (2) can improve cycling time trial (TT) performance, and (3) whether this was affected by a bilateral or an extracephalic montage. This investigation was comprised of two parts (study one and two). In both studies, participants completed a 10-minute FI trial and a 15-minute TT after 10 min of 2 mA anodal left DLPFC tDCS, SHAM or no stimulation. In study one, 11 participants received tDCS via a bilateral montage. In study two, 20 participants received tDCS using an extracephalic montage. Pain was recorded throughout the FI and TT trials, with power output (PO) monitored during the TT. Study one saw no significant changes in pain (tDCS 4.3 ± 2.0; SHAM 4.0 ± 1.8; control 3.8 ± 1.4) during the FI trial and no significant differences in distance covered, pain or PO in the TT. In study two there were no differences in pain reported in the FI trial, or distance covered (P = 0.239), pain or PO in the TT. In summary, tDCS of the DLPFC did not induce analgesia and provided no ergogenic effect for TT performance, moreover these observations were consistent across both the extracephalic and bilateral montage. These findings are in line with an increasing number of studies demonstrating the inconsistent effects of tDCS.

Age as a Mediator of tDCS Effects on Pain: An Integrative Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction: The transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a neuromodulatory technique with the potential to decrease pain scores and to improve chronic pain treatment. Although age is an essential factor that might impact the tDCS effect, most studies are solely conducted in adults. Therefore, the age limitation presents a critical research gap in this field and can be shown by only a handful of studies that have included other age groups. To examine the evidence upon the tDCS effect on pain scores on children, adolescents, or elderly, and indirectly, to infer the age-dependent impact on tDCS effects, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods: A systematic review searching the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE, and Science Direct using the following search terms adapted according to MeSh or Entree: [(“Adolescent” OR “Children” OR “Elderly”) AND (“tDCS”) AND (“Pain” OR “Pain threshold”) AND (“dorsolateral prefrontal cortex” OR “Motor cortex)] up to April 20th, 2020. We retrieved 228 articles, 13 were included in the systematic review, and five studies with elderly subjects that had their outcomes assessed by pain score or pain threshold were included in the meta-analysis.

Results: For the analysis of pain score, 96 individuals received active stimulation, and we found a favorable effect for active tDCS to reduce pain score compared to sham (P = 0.002). The standardized difference was −0.76 (CI 95% = −1.24 to −0.28). For the pain threshold, the analysis showed no significant difference between active and sham tDCS. We reviewed two studies with adolescents: one study using anodal tDCS over the prefrontal cortex reported a reduction in pain scores. However, the second study reported an increase in pain sensitivity for the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) stimulation.

Conclusion: Our findings suggest tDCS may reduce pain levels in the elderly group. Nevertheless, the small number of studies included in this review—and the considerable heterogeneity for clinical conditions and protocols of stimulation present—limits the support of tDCS use for pain treatment in elderly people. Larger studies on the tDCS effect on pain are needed to be conducted in elderly and adolescents, also evaluating different montages and electrical current intensity.

Evidence against benefits from cognitive training and transcranial direct current stimulation in healthy older adults

Cognitive training and brain stimulation show promise for ameliorating age-related neurocognitive decline. However, evidence for this is controversial. In a Registered Report, we investigated the effects of these interventions, where 133 older adults were allocated to four groups (left prefrontal cortex anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) with decision-making training, and three control groups) and trained over 5 days. They completed a task/questionnaire battery pre- and post-training, and at 1- and 3-month follow-ups. COMT and BDNF Val/Met polymorphisms were also assessed. Contrary to work in younger adults, there was evidence against tDCS-induced training enhancement on the decision-making task. Moreover, there was evidence against transfer of training gains to untrained tasks or everyday function measures at any post-intervention time points. As indicated by exploratory work, individual differences may have influenced outcomes. But, overall, the current decision-making training and tDCS protocol appears unlikely to lead to benefits for older adults.

Acute offline transcranial direct current stimulation does not change pain or anxiety produced by the cold pressor test

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the primary motor cortex (M1) has an antalgic effect on acute experimental pain in healthy volunteers. Many published studies have used online stimulation (i.e., tDCS performed during painful stimulation). On the other hand, daily tDCS sessions have been proposed as a therapy for chronic pain (offline tDCS). In such cases, the therapeutic potential depends on the possible aftereffects of each tDCS session. We set out to investigate whether a single tDCS session before application of a classical experimental pain paradigm (the Cold Pressor Test, CPT) would be capable of modulating physiological measures of anxiety as well as pain perception. tDCS was applied to 30 healthy volunteers, 18-28 years old (mean 18.5), with the anode positioned over either the left M1 or the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (l-DLPFC), which has been linked to the affective aspects of experienced pain, including anxiety. All volunteers underwent the CPT procedure before and after a tDCS session. Real 2 mA tDCS sessions for 20 min were compared to sham stimulations. No significant difference was found for any variable after real tDCS sessions when compared to the sham stimulations. This result suggests that effective offline tDCS for chronic pain might have different mechanisms of action. Cumulative effects, functional targeting and the unintended simultaneous stimulation of both M1 and the l-DLPFC are likely responsible for the therapeutic effects of tDCS sessions in the clinical setting.

Methods and strategies of tDCS for the treatment of pain: current status and future directions

INTRODUCTION

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a noninvasive neuromodulation technique that has been widely studied for the treatment of chronic pain. It is considered a promising and safe alternative pain therapy. Different targets have been tested, each having their own particular mechanisms for modulating pain perception.

AREAS COVERED

We discuss the current state of the art of tDCS to manage pain and future strategies to optimize tDCS' effects. Current strategies include primary motor cortex tDCS, prefrontal tDCS and tDCS combined with behavioral interventions while future strategies, on the other hand, include high-intensity tDCS, transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation, cerebellar tDCS, home-based tDCS, and tDCS with extended number of sessions.

EXPERT COMMENTARY

It has been shown that the stimulation of the prefrontal and primary motor cortex is efficient for pain reduction while a few other new strategies, such as high-intensity tDCS and network-based tDCS, are believed to induce strong neuroplastic effects, although the underlying neural mechanisms still need to be fully uncovered. Hence, conventional tDCS approaches demonstrated promising effects to manage pain and new strategies are under development to enhance tDCS effects and make this approach more easily available by using, for instance, home-based devices.

Impact of Age on tDCS Effects on Pain Threshold and Working Memory: Results of a Proof of Concept Cross-Over Randomized Controlled Study

Background: Age is an important factor that impacts the variability of tDCS effects.

Objective/Hypothesis: To compare effects of anodal (a)-tDCS over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), and primary motor cortex (M1) in adolescents, adults, and elderly on heat pain threshold (HPT; primary outcome) and the working memory (WM; secondary outcome). We hypothesized that the effect of tDCS on HPT and WM performance would be the largest in adolescents because their pre-frontal cortex is more prone to neuroplasticity.

Methods: We included 30 healthy women within the age ranges of 15–16 (adolescents, n = 10), 30–40 (adults, n = 10), and 60–70 (elderly, n = 10) years. In this crossover single-blinded study, participants received three interventions applied over the DLPF and M1. The active stimulation intensity was two mA for 30 min. From 20 min of stimulation onset, the tDCS session was coupled with an online n-back task. The a-tDCS and sham were applied in a random sequence, with a washout time of a minimum 7 days between each trial. HPT was evaluated before and after stimulation. The WM performance with an n-back task was assessed after the tDCS session.

Results: A Generalized Estimating Equation (GEE) model revealed a significant effect of the a-tDCS over the left DLPFC to reduce the HPT in adolescents compared with sham. It increased the pain perception significantly [a large effect size (ES) of 1.09)]. In the adults, a-tDCS over M1 enhanced the HPT significantly (a large ES of 1.25) compared to sham. No significant effect for HPT was found in the elderly. Response time for hits was reduced for a-tDCS over the DLPFC in adolescents, as compared to the other two age groups.

Conclusions: These findings suggest that a-tDCS modulates pain perception and WM differentially according to age and target area of stimulation. In adolescents, anodal stimulation over the DLPFC increased the pain perception, while in adults, the stimulation over the M1 increased the pain threshold. Thus, they elucidate the impact of tDCS for different age groups and can help to define what is the appropriate intervention according to age in further clinical trials.

Clinical Trial Registration:www.ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT04328545.

Effects on Volume Load and Ratings of Perceived Exertion in Individuals' Advanced Weight Training After Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation

Lattari, E, Rosa Filho, BJ, Fonseca Junior, SJ, Murillo-Rodriguez, E, Rocha, N, Machado, S, and Maranhão Neto, GA. Effects on volume load and ratings of perceived exertion in individuals' advanced weight training after transcranial direct current stimulation. J Strength Cond Res 34(1): 89-96, 2020-The aim of this study was investigate the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on volume load and ratings of perceived exertion. Fifteen young healthy individuals, aged between 20 and 30 years in advanced strength training were recruited. Test and retest of the 10 maximum repetitions (10RM) were performed to determine the reliability of load used. Subjects performed 3 experimental conditions in a randomized, double-blinded crossover design: anodic stimulation (a-tDCS), cathodic stimulation (c-tDCS), and sham (2 mA for 20 minutes targeting the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex left). Immediately after the experimental conditions, subjects completed 1 set of maximum repetitions with 10RM load (volume load) and answered to OMNI-RES (poststimulation) (level of significance p ≤ 0.05). The volume load showed main effect for condition (F(2, 28) = 164.801; p < 0.001). In poststimulation, a-tDCS was greater than c-tDCS (p ≤ 0.001) and sham (p ≤ 0.001). For ratings of perceived exertion (OMNI-RES), the results showed main effect for condition (F(2, 28) = 9.768; p ≤ 0.05). In poststimulation, c-tDCS was greater than a-tDCS (p ≤ 0.05) and sham (p ≤ 0.05). We conclude that the use of a-tDCS may promote increase in volume load for the LP45 exercise. Moreover, higher volume loads are necessary to maximize muscle strength and anabolism.

Transcranial direct current stimulation effects on hand sensibility as measured by an objective quantitative analysis device: a randomized single-blind sham-control crossover clinical trial

Studies show that transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can modulate somatosensory processing, but optimum parameters for tDCS effects on hand sensibility remain in question. We aimed to test the effects of anodal tDCS (atDCS) and cathodal tDCS (ctDCS) compared with sham tDCS (stDCS) of primary motor (M1) and sensory (S1) cortices on healthy subjects' hand sensibility. In this single-blind clinical trial, 30 randomized healthy volunteers received six tDCS sessions over 6 weeks: one session each of atDCS, ctDCS and stDCS over M1, and one session each of atDCS, ctDCS and stDCS over S1. Current perception threshold (CPT) was assessed using an objective quantitative analysis device (PainVision) at baseline, immediately (T0) and 30 min (T30) after each intervention. Our results showed that both atDCS and ctDCS of S1 and M1 significantly increased CPT. M1 ctDCS at T30 had the greatest effect of all M1 and S1 stimulation conditions (mean difference: 32.94%, Z: 3.12, effect size: 1.82, P < 0.001 The largest effect at S1 was for atDCS at T30 (mean difference: 29.87%, Z: 2.53, effect size: 1.72, P < 0.001. Our results are consistent with tDCS' modulatory effects on hand sensation, especially M1 ctDCS and S1 atDCS.

Effect of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Combined With Patient-Controlled Intravenous Morphine Analgesia on Analgesic Use and Post-Thoracotomy Pain. A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind, Sham-Controlled, Proof-of-Concept Clinical Trial

Background

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is used for various chronic pain conditions, but experience with tDCS for acute postoperative pain is limited. This study investigated the effect of tDCS vs. sham stimulation on postoperative morphine consumption and pain intensity after thoracotomy.

Methods

This is a single-center, prospective, randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trial in lung cancer patients undergoing thoracotomy under general anesthesia. All patients received patient-controlled (PCA) intravenous morphine and intercostal nerve blocks at the end of surgery. The intervention group (a-tDCS, n = 31) received anodal tDCS over the left primary motor cortex (C3-Fp2) for 20 min at 1.2 mA, on five consecutive days; the control group (n = 31) received sham stimulation. Morphine consumption, number of analgesia demands, and pain intensity at rest, with movement and with cough were recorded at the following intervals: immediately before (T1), immediately after intervention (T2), then every hour for 4 h (Т3-Т6), then every 6 h (Т7-Т31) for 5 days. We recorded outcomes on postoperative days 1 and 5 and conducted a phone interview inquiring about chronic pain 1 year later (NCT03005548).

Results

A total of 62 patients enrolled, but tDCS was prematurely stopped in six patients. Fifty-five patients (27 a-tDCS, 28 sham) had three or more tDCS applications and were included in the analysis. Cumulative morphine dose in the first 120 h after surgery was significantly lower in the tDCS [77.00 (54.00-123.00) mg] compared to sham group [112.00 (79.97-173.35) mg, p = 0.043, Cohen's d = 0.42]. On postoperative day 5, maximum visual analog scale (VAS) pain score with cough was significantly lower in the tDCS group [29.00 (20.00-39.00) vs. 44.50 (30.00-61.75) mm, p = 0.018], and pain interference with cough was 80% lower [10.00 (0.00-30.00) vs. 50.00 (0.00-70.00), p = 0.013]. One year after surgery, there was no significant difference between groups with regard to chronic pain and analgesic use.

Conclusion

In lung cancer patients undergoing thoracotomy, three to five tDCS sessions significantly reduced cumulative postoperative morphine use, maximum VAS pain scores with cough, and pain interference with cough on postoperative day 5, but there was no obvious long-term benefit from tDCS.

Randomized Controlled Study Evaluating Efficiency of Low Intensity Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) for Dyspnea Relief in Mechanically Ventilated COVID-19 Patients in ICU: The tDCS-DYSP-COVID Protocol

The severe respiratory distress syndrome linked to the new coronavirus disease (COVID-19) includes unbearable dyspneic suffering which contributes to the deterioration of the prognosis of patients in intensive care unit (ICU). Patients are put on mechanical ventilation to reduce respiratory suffering and preserve life. Despite this mechanical ventilation, most patients continue to suffer from dyspnea. Dyspnea is a major source of suffering in intensive care and one of the main factors that affect the prognosis of patients. The development of innovative methods for its management, especially non-drug management is more than necessary. In recent years, numerous studies have shown that transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) could modulate the perception of acute or chronic pain. In the other hand, it has been shown that the brain zones activated during pain and dyspnea are close and/or superimposed, suggesting that brain structures involved in the integration of aversive emotional component are shared by these two complex sensory experiences. Therefore, it can be hypothesized that stimulation by tDCS with regard to the areas which, in the case of pain have activated one or more of these brain structures, may also have an effect on dyspnea. In addition, our team recently demonstrated that the application of tDCS on the primary cortical motor area can modulate the excitability of the respiratory neurological pathways. Indeed, tDCS in anodal or cathodal modality reduced the excitability of the diaphragmatic cortico-spinal pathways in healthy subjects. We therefore hypothesized that tDCS could relieve dyspnea in COVID-19 patients under mechanical ventilation in ICU. This study was designed to evaluate effects of two modalities of tDCS (anodal and cathodal) vs. placebo, on the relief of dyspnea in COVID-19 patients requiring mechanical ventilation in ICU. Trial Registration: This protocol is derived from the tDCS-DYSP-REA project registered on ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03640455. It will however be registered under its own NCT number.