Immediate and long-term efficacy of transcranial direct current stimulation (tCDS) in obsessive-compulsive disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder and anxiety disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Currently, there is still debate over the effectiveness of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in treating obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and anxiety disorders (ADs). To investigate the immediate and long-term effectiveness of tDCS in these diseases, we conducted a systematic review and quantitative analysis of existing literature on the treatment of OCD, PTSD, and ADs with tDCS. Following the PRISMA guidelines, we searched seven electronic databases and systematically retrieved articles published from May 2012 to June 2024 that compared the effects of active tDCS with sham stimulation in the treatment of these disorders. We included primary outcome measures such as the change scores in disorder-specific and general anxiety symptoms before and after treatment, as well as secondary outcomes such as changes in disorder-specific and general anxiety symptoms at follow-up. We also assessed the impact of tDCS on depressive symptoms. Fifteen papers met the eligibility criteria. Overall, the results of meta-analysis indicated that tDCS had a high effect in improving specific symptoms (SMD = -0.73, 95% CI: -1.09 to -0.37) and general anxiety symptoms (SMD = -0.75; 95% CI: -1.23 to -0.26) in OCD, PTSD and ADs, with effects lasting up to 1 month and showing a moderate effect size. Furthermore, tDCS demonstrated immediate and significant alleviation of depressive symptoms in these diseases. This study concludes that tDCS can serve as a non-invasive brain stimulation technology for treating these disorders, and the therapeutic effects can be maintained for a period of time.

Safety of noninvasive brain stimulation in children

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) is a promising method for altering cortical excitability with clinical implications. It has been increasingly used in children, especially in neurodevelopmental disorders. Yet, its safety and applications in the developing brain require further investigation. This review aims to provide an overview of the safety of commonly used NIBS techniques in children, including transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Safety data for other NIBS methods is not reported in this review.

RECENT FINDINGS

In line with studies from the last decade, findings in the last 2 years (2022-2023) support the safety of NIBS in children and adolescents within the currently applied protocols. Both tES and TMS are well tolerated, if safety rules, including exclusion criteria, are applied.

SUMMARY

We briefly discussed developmental aspects of stimulation parameters that need to be considered in the developing brain and provided an up-to-date overview of tES/TMS applications in children and adolescents. Overall, the safety profile of tES/TMS in children is good. For both the tES and TMS applications, epilepsy and active seizure disorder should be exclusion criteria to prevent potential seizures. Using child-sized earplugs is required for TMS applications. We lack large randomized double-blind trialsand longitudinal studies to establish the safety of NIBS in children.

VIDEO ABSTRACT

http://links.lww.com/YCO/A78 .

A systematic review of randomized controlled trials on efficacy and safety of transcranial direct current stimulation in major neurodevelopmental disorders: ADHD, autism, and dyslexia

OBJECTIVE

Among the target groups in child and adolescent psychiatry, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been more applied in neurodevelopmental disorders specifically, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autism spectrum disorder (ASD), and dyslexia. This systematic review aims to provide the latest update on published randomized-controlled trials applying tDCS in these disorders for evaluating its efficacy and safety.

METHODS

Based on a pre-registered protocol (PROSPERO: CRD42022321430) and using the PRISMA approach, a literature search identified 35 randomized controlled trials investigating the effects of tDCS on children and adolescents with ADHD (n = 17), ASD (n = 11), and dyslexia (n = 7).

RESULTS

In ADHD, prefrontal anodal tDCS is reported more effective compared to stimulation of the right inferior frontal gyrus. Similarly in ASD, prefrontal anodal tDCS was found effective for improving behavioral problems. In dyslexia, stimulating temporoparietal regions was the most common and effective protocol. In ASD and dyslexia, all tDCS studies found an improvement in at least one of the outcome variables while 64.7% of studies (11 of 17) in ADHD found a similar effect. About 88% of all tDCS studies with a multi-session design in 3 disorders (16 of 18) reported a significant improvement in one or all outcome variables after the intervention. Randomized, double-blind, controlled trials consisted of around 70.5%, 36.3%, and 57.1% of tDCS studies in ADHD, ASD, and dyslexia, respectively. tDCS was found safe with no reported serious side effects in 6587 sessions conducted on 745 children and adolescents across 35 studies.

CONCLUSION

tDCS was found safe and partially effective. For evaluation of clinical utility, larger randomized controlled trials with a double-blind design and follow-up measurements are required. Titration studies that systematically evaluate different stimulation intensities, duration, and electrode placement are lacking.

Intensified electrical stimulation targeting lateral and medial prefrontal cortices for the treatment of social anxiety disorder: A randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, dose-comparison study

BACKGROUND

Social Anxiety Disorder (SAD) is the most common anxiety disorder while remains largely untreated. Disturbed amygdala-frontal network functions are central to the pathophysiology of SAD, marked by hypoactivity of the lateral prefrontal cortex (PFC), and hypersensitivity of the medial PFC and the amygdala. The objective of this study was to determine whether modulation of the dorsolateral and medial PFC activity with a novel intensified stimulation protocol reduces SAD core symptoms, improves treatment-related variables, and reduces attention bias to threatening stimuli.

METHODS

In this randomized, sham-controlled, double-blind trial, we assessed the efficacy of an intensified stimulation protocol (20 min, twice-daily sessions with 20 min intervals, 5 consecutive days) in two intensities (1 vs 2 mA) compared to sham stimulations. 45 patients with SAD were randomized in three tDCS arms (1-mA, 2-mA, sham). SAD symptoms, treatment-related variables (worries, depressive state, emotion regulation, quality of life), and attention bias to threatening stimuli (dot-probe paradigm) were assessed before and right after the intervention. SAD symptoms were also assessed at 2-month follow-up.

RESULTS

Both 1-mA and 2-mA protocols significantly reduced fear/avoidance symptoms, worries and improved, emotion regulation and quality of life after the intervention compared to the sham group. Improving effect of the 2-mA protocol on avoidance symptoms, worries and depressive state was significantly larger than the 1-mA group. Only the 2-mA protocol reduced attention bias to threat-related stimuli, the avoidance symptom at follow-up, and depressive states, as compared to the sham group.

CONCLUSIONS

Modulation of lateral-medial PFC activity with intensified stimulation can improve cognitive control, motivation and emotion networks in SAD and might thereby result in therapeutic effects. These effects can be larger with 2-mA vs 1-mA intensities, though a linear relationship between intensity and efficacy should not be concluded. Our results need replication in larger trials.

The role of dorsolateral and ventromedial prefrontal cortex in the processing of emotional dimensions

The ventromedial and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex are two major prefrontal regions that usually interact in serving different cognitive functions. On the other hand, these regions are also involved in cognitive processing of emotions but their contribution to emotional processing is not well-studied. In the present study, we investigated the role of these regions in three dimensions (valence, arousal and dominance) of emotional processing of stimuli via ratings of visual stimuli performed by the study participants on these dimensions. Twenty- two healthy adult participants (mean age 25.21 ± 3.84 years) were recruited and received anodal and sham transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) (1.5 mA, 15 min) over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) and and ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) in three separate sessions with an at least 72-h interval. During stimulation, participants underwent an emotional task in each stimulation condition. The task included 100 visual stimuli and participants were asked to rate them with respect to valence, arousal, and dominance. Results show a significant effect of stimulation condition on different aspects of emotional processing. Specifically, anodal tDCS over the dlPFC significantly reduced valence attribution for positive pictures. In contrast, anodal tDCS over the vmPFC significantly reduced arousal ratings. Dominance ratings were not affected by the intervention. Our results suggest that the dlPFC is involved in control and regulation of valence of emotional experiences, while the vmPFC might be involved in the extinction of arousal caused by emotional stimuli. Our findings implicate dimension-specific processing of emotions by different prefrontal areas which has implications for disorders characterized by emotional disturbances such as anxiety or mood disorders.

Repeated transcranial direct current stimulation of dorsolateral-prefrontal cortex improves executive functions, cognitive reappraisal emotion regulation, and control over emotional processing in borderline personality disorder: A randomized, sham-controlled, parallel-group study

BACKGROUND

Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is primarily characterized by deficient emotion regulation. Impaired cognitive control over negative emotions is central to emotion dysregulation in BPD. Respective executive dysfunctions are associated with hypoactivation of prefrontal regions, and consecutive alterations of fronto-limbic network functionality. Here, we investigated the effect of increasing activity of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) with repeated transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on (1) executive dysfunctions and (2) whether improving cognitive control affects emotion dysregulation and emotional processing in BPD.

METHODS

Thirty-two patients diagnosed with BPD were randomly assigned to active stimulation (N = 16) or sham stimulation (N = 16) group in a randomized, sham-controlled, parallel-group design. They received 10 sessions of active (2 mA, 20 min, anodal left- cathodal right DLPFC) or sham tDCS over 10 days. Major executive functions, emotion regulation strategies, and emotional processing of the patients were assessed before and immediately after the intervention.

RESULTS

The active stimulation group showed a significant improvement in major executive function domains. Importantly, cognitive reappraisal strategy of emotion regulation and several factors of emotional processing involved in the control of emotion significantly improved in the active stimulation group after the intervention. Factors related to emotional expression were, however, not affected.

LIMITATIONS

The single-blind design, absence of follow-up measures, and the intrinsically limited focality of tDCS are limitations of this study.

CONCLUSIONS

Increasing activity of the DLPFC improves executive functioning in BPD and improves ´cognitive control over negative emotions. Cognitive control interventions could be a potential, symptom-driven therapeutic approach in BPD.

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in ADHD: A Systematic Review of Efficacy, Safety, and Protocol-induced Electrical Field Modeling Results

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a promising method for altering cortical excitability with clinical implications. It has been increasingly used in neurodevelopmental disorders, especially attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), but its efficacy (based on effect size calculations), safety, and stimulation parameters have not been systematically examined. In this systematic review, we aimed to (1) explore the effectiveness of tDCS on the clinical symptoms and neuropsychological deficits of ADHD patients, (2) evaluate the safety of tDCS application, especially in children with ADHD, (3) model the electrical field intensity in the target regions based on the commonly-applied and effective versus less-effective protocols, and (4) discuss and propose advanced tDCS parameters. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses approach, a literature search identified 14 empirical experiments investigating tDCS effects in ADHD. Partial improving effects of tDCS on cognitive deficits (response inhibition, working memory, attention, and cognitive flexibility) or clinical symptoms (e.g., impulsivity and inattention) are reported in 10 studies. No serious adverse effects are reported in 747 sessions of tDCS. The left and right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex are the regions most often targeted, and anodal tDCS the protocol most often applied. An intensity of 2 mA induced stronger electrical fields than 1 mA in adults with ADHD and was associated with significant behavioral changes. In ADHD children, however, the electrical field induced by 1 mA, which is likely larger than the electrical field induced by 1 mA in adults due to the smaller head size of children, was sufficient to result in significant behavioral change. Overall, tDCS seems to be a promising method for improving ADHD deficits. However, the clinical utility of tDCS in ADHD cannot yet be concluded and requires further systematic investigation in larger sample sizes. Cortical regions involved in ADHD pathophysiology, stimulation parameters (e.g. intensity, duration, polarity, and electrode size), and types of symptom/deficit are potential determinants of tDCS efficacy in ADHD. Developmental aspects of tDCS in childhood ADHD should be considered as well.