How does anodal transcranial direct current stimulation of the pain neuromatrix affect brain excitability and pain perception? A randomised, double-blind, sham-control study

Facilitation of Early and Middle Latency SEP after tDCS of M1: No Evidence of Primary Somatosensory Homeostatic Plasticity

Homeostatic plasticity is a mechanism that stabilizes cortical excitability within a physiological range. Most homeostatic plasticity protocols have primed and tested the homeostatic response of the primary motor cortex (M1). This study investigated if a homeostatic response could be recorded from the primary sensory cortex (S1) after inducing homeostatic plasticity in M1. In 31 healthy participants, homeostatic plasticity was induced over M1 with a priming and testing block of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in two different sessions (anodal and cathodal). S1 excitability was assessed by early (N20, P25) and middle-latency (N33-P45) somatosensory evoked potentials (SEP) extracted from 4 electrodes (CP5, CP3, P5, P3). Baseline and post-measures (post-priming, 0-min, 10-min, and 20-min after homeostatic induction) were taken. Anodal M1 homeostatic plasticity induction significantly facilitated the N20-P25, P45 peak, and N33-P45 early SEP components up to 20-min post-induction, without any indication of a homeostatic response (i.e., reduced SEP). Cathodal homeostatic induction did not induce any significant effect on early or middle latency SEPs. M1 homeostatic plasticity induction by anodal stimulation protocol to the primary motor cortex did not induce a homeostatic response in SEPs.

Anodal tDCS over the motor cortex improves pain but not physical function in chronic chikungunya arthritis: Randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Chikungunya virus (CHIKV) is a globally prevalent pathogen, with outbreaks occurring in tropical regions. Chronic pain is the main symptom reported and is associated with decreased mobility and disability. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is emerging as a new therapeutic tool for chronic arthralgia.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of 10 consecutive sessions of anodal tDCS on pain (primary outcome) in participants with chronic CHIKV arthralgia. Secondary outcomes included functional status, quality of life, and mood.

METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 30 participants with chronic CHIKV arthralgia were randomly assigned to receive either active (n = 15) or sham (n = 15) tDCS. The active group received 10 consecutive sessions of tDCS over M1 using the C3/Fp2 montage (2 mA for 20 min). Visual analog scale of pain (VAS), health assessment questionnaire (HAQ), short-form 36 health survey (SF-36), pain catastrophizing scale, Hamilton anxiety scale (HAS), timed up and go (TUG) test, lumbar dynamometry, 30-s arm curl and 2-min step test were assessed at baseline, day 10 and at 2 follow-up visits.

RESULTS

There was a significant interaction between group and time on pain (p = 0.03; effect size 95 % CI 0.9 (-1.67 to -0.16), with a significant time interaction (p = 0.0001). There was no interaction between time and group for the 2-minute step test (p = 0.18), but the groups differed significantly at day 10 (p = 0.01), first follow-up (p = 0.01) and second follow-up (p = 0.03). HAQ and SF-36 improved but not significantly. There was no significant improvement in mental health, and physical tests.

CONCLUSION

tDCS appears to be a promising intervention for reducing pain in participants with chronic CHIKV arthralgia, although further research is needed to confirm these findings and explore potential long-term benefits.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials (ReBEC): RBR-245rh7.

Site Dependency of Anodal Transcranial Direct-Current Stimulation on Reaction Time and Transfer of Learning during a Sequential Visual Isometric Pinch Task

Considering the advantages of brain stimulation techniques in detecting the role of different areas of the brain in human sensorimotor behaviors, we used anodal transcranial direct-current stimulation (a-tDCS) over three different brain sites of the frontoparietal cortex (FPC) in healthy participants to elucidate the role of these three brain areas of the FPC on reaction time (RT) during a sequential visual isometric pinch task (SVIPT). We also aimed to assess if the stimulation of these cortical sites affects the transfer of learning during SVIPT. A total of 48 right-handed healthy participants were randomly assigned to one of the four a-tDCS groups: (1) left primary motor cortex (M1), (2) left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), (3) left posterior parietal cortex (PPC), and (4) sham. A-tDCS (0.3 mA, 20 min) was applied concurrently with the SVIPT, in which the participants precisely controlled their forces to reach seven different target forces from 10 to 40% of the maximum voluntary contraction (MVC) presented on a computer screen with the right dominant hand. Four test blocks were randomly performed at the baseline and 15 min after the intervention, including sequence and random blocks with either hand. Our results showed significant elongations in the ratio of RTs between the M1 and sham groups in the sequence blocks of both the right-trained and left-untrained hands. No significant differences were found between the DLPFC and sham groups and the PPC and sham groups in RT measurements within the SVIPT. Our findings suggest that RT improvement within implicit learning of an SVIPT is not mediated by single-session a-tDCS over M1, DLPFC, or PPC. Further research is needed to understand the optimal characteristics of tDCS and stimulation sites to modulate reaction time in a precision control task such as an SVIPT.

Transcranial direct current stimulation for chronic headaches, a randomized, controlled trial

Background and objectives

Chronic headaches are a frequent cause of pain and disability. The purpose of this randomized trial was to examine whether transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) applied to the primary motor cortex, reduces pain and increases daily function in individuals suffering from primary chronic headache.

Materials and methods

A prospective, randomized, controlled trial, where participants and assessors were blinded, investigated the effect of active tDCS vs. sham tDCS in chronic headache sufferers. Forty subjects between 18 and 70 years of age, with a diagnosis of primary chronic headache were randomized to either active tDCS or sham tDCS treatment groups. All patients received eight treatments over four consecutive weeks. Anodal stimulation (2 mA) directed at the primary motor cortex (M1), was applied for 30 min in the active tDCS group. Participants in the sham tDCS group received 30 s of M1 stimulation at the start and end of the 30-minute procedure; for the remaining 29 min, they did not receive any stimulation. Outcome measures based on data collected at baseline, after eight treatments and three months later included changes in daily function, pain levels, and medication.

Results

Significant improvements in both daily function and pain levels were observed in participants treated with active tDCS, compared to sham tDCS. Effects lasted up to 12 weeks post-treatment. Medication use remained unchanged in both groups throughout the trial with no serious adverse effects reported.

Conclusion

These results suggest that tDCS has the potential to improve daily function and reduce pain in patients suffering from chronic headaches. Larger randomized, controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Trial registration

The study was approved by the local ethics committee (2018/2514) and by the Norwegian Centre for Research Data (54483).

The combined effect of neuro-modulation and neuro-stimulation on pain in patients with cervical radiculopathy - a double-blinded, two-arm parallel randomized controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Cervical radiculopathy is one of those disabling conditions which results in central and peripheral pain and thus affects the quality of life. Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) and exercises produce analgesic effect but their long-term effect has not been available to date. Transcranial Direct Current stimulation (tDCS) is known to produce promising effects on central pain by targeting cortical activity.

PURPOSE

To determine the combined effect of tDCS and TENS with exercises on pain and quality of life in patients with cervical radiculopathy.

METHOD

Forty four patients (male: female = 26:18) of the age group 18-50 years were recruited and randomly allocated into the experimental group and control group. The experimental group received active anodal tDCS for 20 min with an intensity of 2 mA, while the control group received sham anodal tDCS. TENS over the pain distribution area for 20 min with 5 Hz intensity and 80-150 ms pulse duration followed by neck-specific exercises were given in both groups. This protocol was given 5 days a week for 4 weeks. Pre and post-assessments were obtained through outcome measures that the Numeric Pain Rating Scale and Neck Disability Index for the measurement of pain, functional disability, and quality of life.

RESULT

Paired t-test/Wilcoxon-Signed Rank test, and Index and Mann-Whitney U test were used to compare the demographic variables within and across the groups, respectively for Neck Disability for Numeric Pain Rating Scale, keeping the P-value < 0.05 as significant. One-way repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was applied to determine the between-subject factor differences. Post hoc tests with Bonferroni correction for repeated analyses were performed. Results depicted a significant effect for NDI (P = 0.001 for both groups) and NPRS (P = 0.003 for the experimental group and 0.007 for the control group). Significant Interaction effect (time*group) was observed for NDI (F = 42, 5382.77) and NPRS (F = 42, 1844.57) with a P-value of 0.001 for both outcome measures. Clinical significance was observed for both outcome measures having a mean difference in 50.21 and 4.57 for NDI and NPRS, respectively compared with the established MCID of 13.2 and 2.2 scores for respective outcome measures.

CONCLUSION

It was concluded that active tDCS along with TENS and exercise intervention was effective on pain, disability, and quality of life in patients with cervical radiculopathy.

Post-stroke fatigue: a review of development, prevalence, predisposing factors, measurements, and treatments

Background

Post-stroke fatigue (PSF) is a ubiquitous and overwhelming symptom for most stroke survivors. However, there are no effective management strategies for PSF, which is partly due to our limited understanding.

Objective

In this paper, we review the development, prevalence, predisposing factors, measurements, and treatments of PSF.

Results

PSF is an independent symptom after stroke, with a prevalence ranging from 42 to 53%, which depends on the selection of measurement tools and stroke characteristics. It is affected by biological, physical, and psychological factors, among which inflammation may play a key role.

Conclusion

Numerous but non-specific evaluation measurement tools limit the management of PSF. In clinical practice, it may be beneficial to identify PSF by combining scales and objective indexes, such as walking tests and electromyographic examinations. There are no evidence-based interventions to improve PSF. However, increasing evidence suggests that transcranial direct-current stimulation and mindfulness-based interventions may become promising treatments. Further studies are urgently needed to better understand the etiology of PSF, thereby providing the basis for developing new measurement tools and targeted treatments.

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) Effects on Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST) and Nociceptive Processing in Healthy Subjects: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to determine the effect that different tDCS protocols have on pain processing in healthy people, assessed using quantitative sensory tests (QST) and evoked pain intensity.

METHODS

We systematically searched in EMBASE, CINAHL, PubMed, PEDro, PsycInfo, and Web of Science. Articles on tDCS on a healthy population and regarding QST, such as pressure pain thresholds (PPT), heat pain thresholds (HPT), cold pain threshold (CPT), or evoked pain intensity were selected. Quality was analyzed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and PEDro scale.

RESULTS

Twenty-six RCTs were included in the qualitative analysis and sixteen in the meta-analysis. There were no significant differences in PPTs between tDCS and sham, but differences were observed when applying tDCS over S1 in PPTs compared to sham. Significant differences in CPTs were observed between tDCS and sham over DLPFC and differences in pain intensity were observed between tDCS and sham over M1. Non-significant effects were found for the effects of tDCS on HPTs.

CONCLUSION

tDCS anodic over S1 stimulation increases PPTs, while a-tDCS over DLPFC affects CPTs. The HPTs with tDCS are worse. Finally, M1 a-tDCS seems to reduce evoked pain intensity in healthy subjects.

Effectiveness of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) as adjunctive treatment for chronic headache in adults with clinically stable systemic lupus erythematosus (SHADE): a randomised double-blind multiarm sham controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Chronic headache is a 'silent' neuropsychiatric systemic lupus erythematosus symptom with heterogeneous prevalence, potentially reaching 54.4%. It may reduce quality of life by increasing the likelihood of depression and sleep disturbance. While pharmacotherapy remains the first-line treatment, the current management is still challenging and needs other non-invasive modalities. An effective, tolerable and disease-specific treatment modality including transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is considered to reduce the frequency of chronic headaches, including in SLE. Until recently, there was no standard protocol for tDCS in treating headaches.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

SHADE is a single-centre randomised double-blind multiarm sham-controlled trial for adults with clinically stable SLE, chronic headaches and without history of traumatic brain injury, brain infection, stroke or brain tumour. Random allocation is conducted to 88 subjects into 3 treatment groups (administration at primary motor, primary sensory and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex) and control group in 1:1:1:1 ratio. The primary endpoint is reduced number of headache days after adjunctive tDCS. The secondary endpoints are reduced headache intensity, increased quality of life, increased sleep quality, decreased depression and reduced analgesics use. The outcome is measured monthly until 3-month postintervention using headache diary, 36-Item Short Form Survey, Chronic Headache Quality of Life Questionnaire, Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index and Mini International Neuropsychiatry Interview version 10 (MINI ICD 10). Intention-to-treat analysis will be performed to determine the best tDCS electrode placement.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval had been obtained from the local Institutional Review Board of Faculty of Medicine Universitas Indonesia. Results will be published through scientific relevant peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05613582.

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.

Supplementing transcranial direct current stimulation to local infiltration series for refractory neuropathic craniocephalic pain: A randomized controlled pilot trial

Background

Some patients with neuralgia of cranial nerves with otherwise therapy-refractory pain respond to invasive therapy with local anesthetics. Unfortunately, pain regularly relapses despite multimodal pain management. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) may prolong pain response due to neuro-modulatory effects.

Methods

This controlled clinical pilot trial randomized patients to receive anodal, cathodal or sham-tDCS stimulation prior to local anesthetic infiltration. Pain attenuation, quality-of-life and side effects were assessed and compared with historic controls to estimate effects of tDCS stimulation setting.

Results

Altogether, 17 patients were randomized into three groups with different stimulation protocols. Relative reduction of pain intensity in per protocol treated patients were median 73%, 50% and 69% in anodal, cathodal and sham group, respectively (p = 0.726). Compared with a historic control group, a lower rate of responders with 50% reduction of pain intensity indicates probable placebo effects (OR 3.41 stimulation vs. non-stimulation setting, NNT 3.63). 76.9% (n = 10) of tDCS patients reported mild side-effects. Of all initially included 17 patients, 23.5% (n = 4) withdrew their study participation with highest proportion in the cathodal group (n = 3). A sample size calculation for a confirmatory trial revealed 120 patients using conservative estimations.

Discussion

This pilot trial does not support series of anodal tDCS as neuro-modulatory treatment to enhance pain alleviation of local anesthetic infiltration series. Notably, results may indicate placebo effects of tDCS settings. Feasibility of studies in this population was limited due to relevant drop-out rates. Anodal tDCS warrants further confirmation as neuro-modulatory pain treatment option.

Anodal-TDCS over Left-DLPFC Modulates Motor Cortex Excitability in Chronic Lower Back Pain

Chronic pain is associated with abnormal cortical excitability and increased pain intensity. Research investigating the potential for transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to modulate motor cortex excitability and reduce pain in individuals with chronic lower back pain (CLBP) yield mixed results. The present randomised, placebo-controlled study examined the impact of anodal-tDCS over left-dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (left-DLPFC) on motor cortex excitability and pain in those with CLBP. Nineteen participants with CLBP (Mage = 53.16 years, SDage = 14.80 years) received 20-min of sham or anodal tDCS, twice weekly, for 4 weeks. Short interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) and intracortical facilitation (ICF) were assessed using paired-pulse Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation prior to and immediately following the tDCS intervention. Linear Mixed Models revealed no significant effect of tDCS group or time, on SICI or ICF. The interactions between tDCS group and time on SICI and ICF only approached significance. Bayesian analyses revealed the anodal-tDCS group demonstrated higher ICF and SICI following the intervention compared to the sham-tDCS group. The anodal-tDCS group also demonstrated a reduction in pain intensity and self-reported disability compared to the sham-tDCS group. These findings provide preliminary support for anodal-tDCS over left-DLPFC to modulate cortical excitability and reduce pain in CLBP.

Transcranial direct current stimulation for balance rehabilitation in neurological disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Postural instability is common in neurological diseases. Although transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) seems to be a promising complementary therapy, emerging evidence indicates mixed results and protocols' characteristics. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis on PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science to synthesize key findings of the effectiveness of single and multiple sessions of tDCS alone and combined with other interventions on balance in adults with neurological disorders. Thirty-seven studies were included in the systematic review and 33 in the meta-analysis. The reviewed studies did not personalize the stimulation protocol to individual needs/characteristics. A random-effects meta-analysis indicated that tDCS alone (SMD = -0.44; 95%CI = -0.69/-0.19; p < 0.001) and combined with another intervention (SMD = -0.31; 95%CI = -0.51/-0.11; p = 0.002) improved balance in adults with neurological disorders (small to moderate effect sizes). Balance improvements were evidenced regardless of the number of sessions and targeted area. In summary, tDCS is a promising therapy for balance rehabilitation in adults with neurological disorders. However, further clinical trials should identify factors that influence responsiveness to tDCS for a more tailored approach, which may optimize the clinical use of tDCS.

Ten sessions of transcranial direct current stimulation for chronic chikungunya arthralgia: study protocol for a randomised clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

The chikungunya virus infection is still an epidemic in Brazil with an incidence of 59.4 cases per 100 000 in the Northeast region. More than 60% of the patients present relapsing and remitting chronic arthralgia with debilitating pain lasting for years. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) appears promising as a novel neuromodulation approach for pain-related networks to alleviate pain in several pain syndromes. Our objective is to evaluate the effectiveness of tDCS (C3/Fp2 montage) on pain, muscle strength, functionality and quality of life in chronic arthralgia.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This protocol is a single-centre, parallel-design, double-blind, randomised, sham-controlled trial. Forty participants will be randomised to either an active or sham tDCS. A total of 10 sessions will be administered over 2 weeks (one per weekday) using a monophasic continuous current with an intensity of 2 mA for 20 min. Participants will be evaluated at baseline, after the 10th session, 2 weeks and 4 weeks after intervention.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

pain assessed using numeric rating scale and algometry.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

muscle strength, functionality and quality of life. The effects of stimulation will be calculated using a mixed analysis of variance model.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study was approved by the ethics committee of the Faculty of Health Sciences of Trairí, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte (No. 2.413.851) and registered on the Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials. Study results will be disseminated through presentations at conferences and publications in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

RBR-469yd6.

Transcranial direct current stimulation alters sensorimotor modulation during cognitive representation of movement

We recently demonstrated, by means of short latency afferent inhibition (SAI), that before an imagined movement, during the reaction time (RT), SAI decreases only in the movement-related muscle (sensorimotor modulation) and that a correlation exists between sensorimotor modulation and motor imagery (MI) ability. Excitatory anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (a-tDCS) on M1 could enhance the MI outcome; however, mechanisms of action are not completely known. Here, we assessed if a-tDCS on M1 prior to an MI task could affect sensorimotor modulation. Participants imagined abducting the index or little finger in response to an acoustic signal. SAI was evaluated from the first dorsal interosseus after the “go” signal, before the expected electromyographic (EMG) activity. Participants received 20-min 1.5 mA a-tDCS or sham-tDCS on M1 on two different days, in random order. Results showed that a-tDCS on M1 increases the sensorimotor modulation consisting of a weakening of SAI after the Go signal with respect to sham-tDCS, in the movement-related muscle right before the beginning of MI. These results suggest that a-tDCS on M1 further potentiate those circuits responsible for sensorimotor modulation in the RT phase of MI. Increased sensorimotor modulation during MI may be one of the mechanisms involved in MI improvement after a-tDCS over M1.

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.

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).

Therapeutic benefits of noninvasive somatosensory cortex stimulation on cortical plasticity and somatosensory function: a systematic review

Optimal limb coordination requires efficient transmission of somatosensory information to the sensorimotor cortex. The primary somatosensory cortex (S1) is frequently damaged by stroke, resulting in both somatosensory and motor impairments. Noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) to the primary motor cortex is thought to induce neural plasticity that facilitates neurorehabilitation. Several studies have also examined if NIBS to the S1 can enhance somatosensory processing as assessed by somatosensory-evoked potentials (SEPs) and improve behavioral task performance, but it remains uncertain if NIBS can reliably modulate S1 plasticity or even whether SEPs can reflect this plasticity. This systematic review revealed that NIBS has relatively minor effects on SEPs or somatosensory task performance, but larger early SEP changes after NIBS can still predict improved performance. Similarly, decreased paired-pulse inhibition in S1 post-NIBS is associated with improved somatosensory performance. However, several studies still debate the role of inhibitory function in somatosensory performance after NIBS in terms of the direction of the change (that, disinhibition or inhibition). Altogether, early SEP and paired-pulse inhibition (particularly inter-stimulus intervals of 30-100 ms) may become useful biomarkers for somatosensory deficits, but improved NIBS protocols are required for therapeutic applications.

Modulation Of Experimental Prolonged Pain and Sensitization Using High-Definition Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation: A Double-Blind, Sham-Controlled Study

High definition transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS) targeting brain areas involved in pain processing has shown analgesic effects in some chronic pain conditions, but less modulatory effect on mechanical and thermal pain thresholds in asymptomatic subjects. This double-blinded study assessed the HD-tDCS effects on experimental pain and hyperalgesia maintained for several days in healthy participants. Hyperalgesia and pain were assessed during three consecutive days following provocation of experimental pain (nerve growth factor injected into the right-hand muscle) and daily HD-tDCS sessions (20-minutes). Forty subjects were randomly assigned to Active-tDCS targeting primary motor cortex and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex simultaneously or Sham-tDCS. Tactile and pressure pain sensitivity were assessed before and after each HD-tDCS session, as well as the experimentally-induced pain intensity scored on a numerical rating scale (NRS). Subjects were effectively blinded to the type of HD-tDCS protocol. The Active-tDCS did not significantly reduce the NGF-induced NRS pain score (3.5±2.4) compared to Sham-tDCS (3.9±2.0, P > .05) on day 3 and both groups showed similarly NGF-decreased pressure pain threshold in the right hand (P < .001). Comparing Active-tDCS with Sham-tDCS, the manifestation of pressure hyperalgesia was delayed on day 1, and an immediate (pre-HD-tDCS to post-HD-tDCS) reduction in pressure hyperalgesia was found across all days (P < .05). PERSPECTIVE: The non-significant differences between Active-tDCS and Sham-tDCS on experimental prolonged pain and hyperalgesia suggest that HD-tDCS has no effect on moderate persistent experimental pain. The intervention may still have a positive effect in more severe pain conditions, with increased intensity, more widespread distribution, or increased duration and/or involving stronger affective components.

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.

Relieving Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain in Older Adults Using Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation: Effects on Pain Intensity, Quality, and Pain-Related Outcomes

Introduction

Chronic pain is a significant health problem and is particularly prevalent amongst the elderly. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation technique that has been proposed to reduce chronic pain. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the efficacy of active and sham tDCS in reducing pain in older individuals living with chronic musculoskeletal pain.

Materials and Methods

Twenty-four older individuals (mean age: 68 ± 7 years) suffering from chronic musculoskeletal pain were randomized to receive either anodal tDCS over the contralateral motor cortex (2 mA, 20 min; n = 12) or sham tDCS (20 min; n = 12) for five consecutive days. Pain logbooks were used to measure pain intensity. Questionnaires (McGill Pain Questionnaire, Brief Pain Inventory, Beck Depression Inventory [BDI], Beck Anxiety Inventory, Pain Catastrophizing Scale [PCS], and Margolis Pain Drawing and Scoring System [MPDSS]) were also used to assess pain in its globality.

Results

Analysis of pain logbooks revealed that active tDCS led to a reduction in daily average pain intensity (all p ≤ 0.04), while sham tDCS did not produce any change (p = 0.15). Between-group comparisons for change in pain intensity reduction between active and sham tDCS showed a trend during treatment (p = 0.08) which was significant at the follow-up period (p = 0.02). Active tDCS also improved scores of all questionnaires (all p ≤ 0.02), while sham tDCS only reduced MPDSS scores (p = 0.04). Between-group comparisons for the pain-related outcomes showed significant differences for BDI et PCS after the last tDCS session.

Conclusions

These results suggest that anodal tDCS applied over the primary motor cortex is an effective modality to decrease pain in older individuals. tDCS can also improve other key outcomes, such as physical and emotional functioning, and catastrophic thinking.

Case Report: Initial Evidence of Safety and Efficacy of High Definition-Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in a Patient With Neuropathic Pain and Implanted Spinal Cord Stimulator

Neuropathic pain (NP), often treatment-refractory, is one of the most debilitating conditions contributing to suffering and disability worldwide. Recently, non-invasive neuromodulation techniques, particularly repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) have emerged as potential therapeutic alternatives due to their ability to alter cortical excitability of neural circuits. However, the magnetic field induced in rTMS may be unsafe for patients with an implanted electrode in the head or neck area while tDCS poses no theoretical risk of injury to these patients. High definition (HD)-tDCS is a novel, more focal technique of tDCS and may be safer to the patient compared to the more diffuse stimulation of conventional tDCS. To our knowledge, no study has ever demonstrated the safety and/or feasibility of HD-tDCS in patients with spinal cord stimulation (SCS) devices using computational modeling of induced electrical fields. Furthermore, this study highlights the potential use of (HD-)tDCS as predictive tool for a positive response in chronic epidural motor cortex stimulation (MCS), especially in patients with an implanted device not suitable for rTMS. In a 54-year-old woman with an implanted spinal cord stimulation (SCS) system for another pain syndrome, HD-tDCS was initiated for refractory post-surgical inferior alveolar nerve neuropathy. She was submitted to 7 days of anodal HD-tDCS over the left motor cortex at 1.5 mA for 30 min. A notable decrease in pain perception was observed, lasting for approximately 5-6 h (Numeric Rating Score decreased from 8 to 4.34). No adverse events were reported. The stimulation parameters and clinical efficacy of the SCS system remained unchanged. Additionally, computational analysis indicated no meaningful alteration of current flow when considering a model with a SCS implant with respect to a model without implant. Regarding the positive therapeutic effect of HD-tDCS, the patient was selected for an epidural MCS trial and subsequent implantation, which showed short-term pain relief of 50-75%. Although one case does not demonstrate efficacy, tolerability, or safety to the novel intervention, it paves the way for better diagnosis and treatment for patients who are otherwise excluded from other non-invasive neuromodulation techniques, such as rTMS. A positive tDCS effect could be a potential biomarker for positive epidural MCS response in patients with an implanted stimulation device non-compatible with rTMS.

Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on patients with post-stroke fatigue: a study protocol for a double-blind randomized controlled trial

Introduction

Post-stroke fatigue (PSF) is an abnormal, persistent, and unexplained physical and psychological tiredness in patients after stroke. It is a common symptom of stroke patients with poor quality of life and bleak prognosis, and the incidence rate is up to 39% to 72%. It has been widely reported that medicine treatments achieved a lot of progress, there still needs to develop more powerful new strategies to more powerful effect. The transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) shows great potential for the treatment of PSF. This study proposes to apply a double-blind randomized controlled clinical trial to explore the effect and safety of tDCS combined with routine rehabilitation for PSF.

Methods and analysis

One hundred patients with PSF will be randomly divided into two groups. One of the groups will receive conventional rehabilitation therapy and active tDCS, whereas another group will receive conventional rehabilitation treatment and sham tDCS. Both groups will receive the intervention for 4 weeks, during which time they will undergo either active or sham tDCS 20 min a day, 6 days a week. Primary outcome: Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS) will be measured at baseline every weekend during the intervention period. Secondary results: Fatigue Impact Scale (FIS), Functional Assessment Chronic Illness Therapy (Fatigue) (FACIT-F), and Specialized Quality of Life Scale in Stroke (SS-QOL) will be measured at baseline and at the end of the intervention time of 4 weeks. Throughout the study, adverse events and adverse reactions will be measured during every treatment. The research study “Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on patients with post-stroke fatigue” has been approved by the Ethics Committee of the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University: Clinical Medicine Ethics Review [2015]043 in Nov 2015.

Discussion

This study will provide insight into the efficacy of transcranial direct-current stimulation for post-stroke fatigue. This is a double-blind randomized controlled trial whose aim is to assess the effects of tDCS on PSF. This study can provide more information about the treatment of PSF. This study has a period of follow-up, which allows for greater accuracy. It is a single-center trial, and this may be a limitation. The other limitation of this study is the relatively small number of participants; thus, the influence of chance on experimental results cannot be completely ruled out.

Trial registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2000031120. Registered on March 22, 2020. This protocol version number is V1.1.

Paired Acute Invasive/Non-invasive Stimulation (PAINS) study: A phase I/II randomized, sham-controlled crossover trial in chronic neuropathic pain

BACKGROUND

Dorsal root ganglion (DRG) stimulation, an invasive method of neuromodulation, and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), a non-invasive method of altering cortical excitability, have both proven effective in relieving chronic pain.

OBJECTIVE

We employed a randomized, sham-controlled crossover study design to investigate whether single-session tDCS would have an additive therapeutic effect alongside DRG stimulation (DRGS) in the treatment of chronic pain.

METHODS

Sixteen neuropathic pain patients who were previously implanted with DRG stimulators were recruited. Baseline pain scores were established with DRGS-OFF. Pain scores were then recorded with DRGS-ON, after paired sham tDCS stimulation, and after paired active anodal tDCS (a-tDCS) stimulation. For active tDCS, patients were randomized to 'MEG (magnetoencephalography) localized' tDCS or contralateral motor cortex (M1) tDCS for 30 min. EEG recordings and evaluations of tDCS adverse effects were also collected.

RESULTS

All participants reported the interventions to be tolerable with no significant adverse effects during the session. Paired DRGS/active tDCS resulted in a significant reduction in pain scores compared to paired DRGS-ON/sham tDCS or DRGS alone. There was no difference in the additive effect of M1 vs. MEG-localized tDCS. Significant augmentation of beta activity was observed between DRGS-OFF and DRGS-ON conditions, as well as between paired DRGS-ON/sham tDCS and paired DRGS-ON/active tDCS.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that a single session of tDCS alongside DRGS is safe and can significantly reduce pain acutely in neuropathic pain patients. Paired invasive/non-invasive neuromodulation is a promising new treatment strategy for pain management and should be evaluated further to assess long-term benefits.

A randomized controlled trial to explore the efficacy and safety of transcranial direct current stimulation on patients with post-stroke fatigue

BACKGROUND

Post-stroke fatigue seriously affects the quality of life for stroke patients. There is no effective treatment at present. transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation which may have therapeutic effect on post-stroke fatigue. This study will explore about this.

METHOD

A total of 60 patients with post-stroke fatigue were randomly divided into the control group and the treatment group with 30 patients each by minimization randomization. Both groups received basic treatment and conventional rehabilitation. In the treatment group, patients were treated with active tDCS, while in the control group, sham tDCS. Both active and sham tDCS were administered 6 times a week for 4 weeks. Before and after the trial, the Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS), Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) and Modified Barthel Index (MBI) were evaluated and analyzed. And comparisons were made among groups. And there were an 8-week follow-up after the intervention.

RESULT

Before the intervention, there were no significant differences in baseline data and assessment scores between the groups (P > 0.05). After 4 weeks of intervention, FSS scores in the treatment group were significantly lower than those in the control group (P = 0.012), and FMA and BMI scores were significantly higher than those in the control group (P < 0.05). There was no significant change in FSS scores after 8 months of follow-up (P > 0.05).

DISCUSSION

TDCS is a safe treatment that can effectively reduce the degree of fatigue after stroke, improve the motor function and daily activity ability of patients after stroke, and the efficacy is better than only routine rehabilitation training.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2000031120. Registered on March 22, 2020.

Somatosensory Gating Is Modulated by Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation

Background

Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of the somatosensory cortex causes cerebral hyperexcitability and a significant enhancement in pain thresholds and tactile spatial acuity. Sensory gating is a brain mechanism to suppress irrelevant incoming inputs, which is elicited by presenting pairs of identical stimuli (S1 and S2) within short time intervals between stimuli (e.g., 500 ms).

Objectives/Hypothesis

The present study addressed the question of whether tDCS could modulate the brain correlates of this inhibitory mechanism.

Methods

Forty-one healthy individuals aged 18–26 years participated in the study and were randomly assigned to tDCS (n = 21) or SHAM (n = 20). Somatosensory evoked potentials (SEP) elicited by S1 and S2 pneumatic stimuli (duration of 100 ms, ISI 550 ± 50 ms) and applied to the index finger of the dominant hand were recorded before and after tDCS.

Results

Before the intervention, the second tactile stimuli significantly attenuated the amplitudes of P50, N100, and the late positive complex (LPC, mean amplitude in the time window 150–350) compared to the first stimuli. This confirmed that sensory gating is a widespread brain inhibitory mechanism that can affect early- and middle-latency components of SEPs. Furthermore, our data revealed that this response attenuation or sensory gating (computed as S1 minus S2) was improved after tDCS for LPC, while no changes were found in participants who received SHAM.

Conclusion

All these findings suggested that anodal tDCS might modulate brain excitability leading to an enhancement of inhibitory mechanisms elicited in response to repetitive somatosensory stimuli during late stages of information processing.

The effect of transcranial direct stimulation as an add-on treatment to conventional physical therapy on pain intensity and functional ability in individuals with knee osteoarthritis: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of adding transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to conventional physiotherapy treatment (PT) on pain and performance of individuals with knee osteoarthritis (KOA).

METHODS

Eighty people suffering from chronic KOA participated in this study. They were randomly divided into four treatment groups, including PT combined with tDCS over the primary motor cortex (M1), PT combined with tDCS over the primary sensory cortex (S1), PT combined with tDCS over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), and PT combined with sham tDCS. A visual analog scale (VAS) for pain intensity, the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) questionnaire for knee-related disability, and several performance tests (stepping 15 s, chair stand test in 30 s, and walking 4 × 10 m) were used for assessment following 10 sessions of tDCS (T1), and one month after the last session of tDCS (T2).

RESULTS

Differential effects on pain intensity, knee-related disability, and performance were found between groups. Compared to sham tDCS: (i) tDCS over M1 improved VAS pain score, KOOS disability score, and performance tests at T1 and T2; (ii) tDCS over S1 improved VAS pain score at T1 and T2 and KOOS disability score and performance tests at T2; (iii) tDCS over the DLPFC improved VAS pain score at T1 and performance tests at T1 and T2.

CONCLUSION

tDCS could be a beneficial add-on treatment to conventional PT for pain relief, disability reduction and functional improvement in patients with KOA.

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.

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.

Is Allodynia a Determinant Factor in the Effectiveness of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in the Prophylaxis of Migraine?

OBJECTIVES

Allodynia, the clinical marker of central sensitization, affects even simple daily living activities and increases the tendency for migraine to be more resistant to treatment and have a chronic course. Migraine that impairs quality of life can often be treated with variable pharmaceutical agents, but with various side effects. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a potential alternative treatment for migraine prophylaxis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Seventy-seven patients diagnosed with migraine (48 with allodynia and 29 without allodynia) were included in the study. Randomly, 41 of the 77 patients received sham stimulation and 36 patients underwent three sessions of anodal left primary motor cortex stimulation for 2 mA, 20 min. Migraine attack characteristics (frequency, severity, and duration) and analgesic drug use were followed with headache diaries for one month after the stimulation.

RESULTS

After tDCS, migraine attack frequency (p = 0.021), the number of headache days (p = 0.005), duration of attacks (p = 0.008), and symptomatic analgesic drug use (p = 0.007) decreased in patients receiving active tDCS, compared to the sham group. The therapeutic gain of tDCS was calculated as 44% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 22-60%) for headache days and 76% (95% CI: 55-86) for headache duration. Response to tDCS treatment was higher in patients without allodynia (60% vs. 24%; p = 0.028) and allodynia came out as an independent predictor of response to tDCS with logistic regression analysis. Side effects were rare and similar to the sham group.

CONCLUSIONS

tDCS is a safe, efficacious, and fast method for migraine prophylaxis. However, the administration of tDCS before allodynia occurs, that is, before central sensitization develops, will provide increased responsiveness to the treatment.

SIGNIFICANCE

tDCS is more effective before the development of allodynia, but it also improves the quality of life even after the development of allodynia.

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.

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation of the Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex Alters Emotional Modulation of Spinal Nociception

Emotion has a strong modulatory effect on pain perception and spinal nociception. Pleasure inhibits pain and nociception, whereas displeasure facilitates pain and nociception. Dysregulation of this system has been implicated in development and maintenance of chronic pain. The current study sought to examine whether emotional modulation of pain could be altered through the use of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to enhance (via anodal stimulation) or depress (via cathodal stimulation) cortical excitability in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Thirty-two participants (15 female, 17 male) received anodal, cathodal, and sham tDCS on three separate occasions, followed immediately by testing to examine the impact of pleasant and unpleasant images on pain and nociceptive flexion reflex (NFR) responses to electrocutaneous stimulation. Results indicated that tDCS modulated the effect of image content on NFR, F(2, 2175.06) = 3.20, P= .04, with the expected linear slope following anodal stimulation (ie, pleasant < neutral < unpleasant) but not cathodal stimulation. These findings provide novel evidence that the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex is critical to emotional modulation of spinal nociception. Moreover, the results suggest a physiological basis for a previously identified phenotype associated with risk for chronic pain and thus a potentially new target for chronic pain prevention efforts. PERSPECTIVE: This study demonstrated that reduction of dorsolateral prefrontal cortical excitability by transcranial direct current stimulation attenuates the impact of emotional image viewing on nociceptive reflex activity during painful electrocutaneous stimulation. This result confirms there is cortical involvement in emotional modulation of spinal nociception and opens avenues for future clinical research.

Effect of Different Intensities of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Postural Response to External Perturbation in Patients With Parkinson’s Disease

Background

Habituation of postural response to perturbations is impaired in people with Parkinson’s disease (PD) due to deficits in cortico-basal pathways. Although transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) modulate cortico-basal networks, it remains unclear if it can benefit postural control in PD.

Objective

To analyze the effect of different intensities of anodal tDCS on postural responses and prefrontal cortex (PFC) activity during the habituation to the external perturbation in patients with PD (n = 24).

Methods

Anodal tDCS was applied over the primary motor cortex (M1) with 1 mA, 2 mA, and sham stimulation in 3 different sessions (~2 weeks apart) during 20 minutes immediately before the postural assessment. External perturbation (7 trials) was applied by a support base posterior translation (20 cm/s and 5 cm). Primary outcome measures included lower limb electromyography and center of pressure parameters. Measures of PFC activity are reported as exploratory outcomes. Analyses of variance (Stimulation Condition × Trial) were performed.

Results

Habituation of perturbation was evidenced independent of the stimulation conditions. Both active stimulation intensities had shorter recovery time and a trend for lower cortical activity in the stimulated hemisphere when compared to sham condition. Shorter onset latency of the medial gastrocnemius as well as lower cortical activity in the nonstimulated hemisphere were only observed after 2 mA concerning the sham condition.

Conclusions

tDCS over M1 improved the postural response to external perturbation in PD, with better response observed for 2 mA compared with 1 mA. However, tDCS seems to be inefficient in modifying the habituation of perturbation.

The Hypnotic Analgesia Suggestion Mitigated the Effect of the Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on the Descending Pain Modulatory System: A Proof of Concept Study

Objective

We evaluated whether active(a)-tDCS combined with hypnotic analgesia suggestion (HS) would be more effective than a single active(a)-tDCS, and/or sham-(s)-tDCS and s-tDCS/HS on the following outcomes: function of descending pain modulatory system (DPMS) during the conditioned pain modulation test (CPM-test) (primary outcome), heat pain threshold (HPT), heat pain tolerance (HPTo) and cold pressor test (CPT) (secondary outcomes). We also examined whether their effects are related to neuroplasticity state evaluated by serum brain-derived-neurotropic factor (BDNF).

Materials and Methods

Forty-eight females received one session of one of the four interventions (a-tDCS/HS, s-tDCS/HS, a-tDCS, and s-tDCS) in an incomplete randomized crossover sequence. The a-tDCS or s-tDCS was applied over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) for 30 minutes at 2mA.

Results

A generalized linear model revealed a significant main effect for the intervention group (P <0.032). The delta-(Δ) pain score on the Numerical Pain Scale (NPS0-10) during CPM-test in the a-tDCS/HS group was -0.25 (0.43). The (Δ) pain score on NPS (0-10) during CPM-test in the other three groups was a-tDCS=-0.54 (0.41), HS -0.01 (0.41) and s-tDCS/HS=-0.19 (0.43). A-tDCS/HS intervention increased the CPT substantially compared to all other interventions. Also, higher baseline levels of BDNF were associated with a larger change in CPT and HPTo.

Conclusion

These findings indicate that the HS combined with a-tDCS mitigated the effect of the a-tDCS on the DPMS. The a-tDCS up-regulates the inhibition on DPMS, and the HS improved pain tolerance. And, together they enhanced the reaction time substantially upon the CPT.

Clinical Trial Registration

www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT03744897.

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Accelerates The Onset of Exercise-Induced Hypoalgesia: A Randomized Controlled Study

Exercise-induced hypoalgesia (EIH) describes acute reductions in pain that occur following exercise. Current evidence suggests that the magnitude of EIH is small-to-moderate at best, warranting exploration of novel avenues to bolster these effects. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been shown to relieve pain and represents a promising intervention that may enhance EIH. This study aimed to determine whether anodal tDCS of the primary motor cortex (M1) can augment EIH in healthy individuals experiencing experimentally-induced musculoskeletal pain. Twenty-four healthy subjects attended 2 experimental sessions ("Day 0" and "Day 2"). On Day 0, subjects were injected with nerve growth factor into their right extensor carpi radialis brevis to induce persistent elbow pain. On Day 2, each subject received active or sham tDCS over M1 followed by an isometric grip exercise. Pain intensity, muscle soreness, sensitivity (pressure pain thresholds), and conditioned pain modulation were assessed prior to the nerve growth factor injection, on Day 2 before tDCS, immediately post-exercise, and 15 minutes post-exercise. Active tDCS expedited the onset of EIH, inducing immediate reductions in pain intensity that were not present until 15 minutes post-exercise in the sham group. However, active tDCS did not reduce muscle soreness or sensitivity when compared to sham tDCS. PERSPECTIVE: These findings suggest that active tDCS accelerates the onset of EIH in healthy individuals experiencing experimentally-induced pain. This may represent a promising means of enhancing adherence to exercise protocols. However, larger randomised controlled trials in persistent pain populations are required to confirm the clinical impact of these findings.

The effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on corticospinal and cortico-cortical excitability and response variability: Conventional versus high-definition montages

Response variability following transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) highlights need for exploring different tDCS electrode montages. Corticospinal excitability (CSE), cortico-cortical excitability and intra-individual variability was compared following conventional and high-definition (HD) anodal (a-tDCS) and cathodal (c-tDCS) tDCS. Fifteen healthy males attended four sessions at-least one-week apart: conventional a-tDCS, conventional c-tDCS, HD-a-tDCS, HD-c-tDCS. TDCS was administered (1 mA, 10-minutes) over primary motor cortex (M1), via 6 × 4 cm active and 7 × 5 cm return electrodes (conventional tDCS) and 4 × 1 ring-electrodes 3.5 cm apart over M1 (HD-tDCS). For CSE, twenty-five single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) peak-to-peak motor evoked potentials (MEP) were recorded at baseline, 0-minutes and 30-minutes post-tDCS. Twenty-five paired-pulse MEPs with 3-millisecond (ms) inter-pulse interval (IPI) and twenty-five at 10 ms assessed short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) and intracortical facilitation (ICF). MEP standardised z-values standard deviations represented intra-individual variability. No significant changes in CSE from baseline were reported for all four interventions. No significant differences were reported in CSE between conventional and HD a-tDCS, but significant differences between conventional and HD c-tDCS 0-minutes post-tDCS. Conventional tDCS significantly reduced intra-individual variability compared to HD-tDCS for a-tDCS (0-minutes) and c-tDCS (30-minutes). No changes were reported for SICI/ICF. These novel findings of increased intra-individual variability following HD-tDCS, at the current stimulus parameters, highlight need for further nuanced research and refinement to optimise the HD-tDCS dosage-response relationship.

Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation over frontal, parietal and cerebellar cortex for cognitive function during fasting in healthy adults

Background

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a neuromodulation tool used to modify the cognitive function in subjects. There is a paucity of data on tDCS' effect on cognitive function during Ramadan fasting. This paper aims to assess the effect of tDCS of three brain areas, including the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), posterior parietal cortex (PPC), and cerebellum on cognitive function, and obtain safety data in healthy adults during Ramadan fasting.

Methods and material

A total of 42 healthy, right-handed participants were randomly assigned to one of the 6 stimulation groups: active (anodal)-tDCS of right DLPFC, PPC, and cerebellum; or sham for DLPFC, PPC, and cerebellum after 8 h of fasting for Ramadan. Safety data and cognitive function, such as attention-switching tasks (AST), were obtained by employing the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB) before and after each tDCS session. The cognitive function outcome variables were the response time and the percentage of correct answers in AST. For sham stimulation, the placement of the electrodes was the same as for the active stimulation.

Results

An improvement in performance time in attention tasks was observed; however, it did not reach a significant level after anodal stimulation of the DLPFC, PPC, and cerebellum. Overall, there were no statistically significant differences between the active and sham tDCS groups in cognitive function. There were no significant side effects of tDCS during fasting for any group.

Conclusions

Our data suggest that there are variable effects of tDCS on attention tasks during Ramadan fasting. TDCS appears to be safe, well-tolerated and adhered to the international standard of safety in the local population during Ramadan fasting. Further large sample size studies should be conducted to validate the current study findings and reach better conclusions.

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.

Determination of anodal tDCS duration threshold for reversal of corticospinal excitability: An investigation for induction of counter-regulatory mechanisms

BACKGROUND

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is used to induce neuroplasticity in the human brain. Within certain limits of stimulation duration, anodal tDCS (a-tDCS) over the primary motor cortex induces long term potentiation- (LTP) like plasticity. A reversal of the direction of plasticity has however been described with prolonged a-tDCS protocols.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to systematically investigate the intervention duration threshold for reversal of a-tDCS-induced effects on corticospinal excitability (CSE) and to determine the probable mechanisms involved in these changes.

METHODS

Fifteen healthy participants received a-tDCS of 1 mA for five different durations in pseudo-random session order. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) was delivered over the left M1, and motor evoked potentials (MEPs) of a contralateral hand muscle were recorded before, immediately and 30 min following intervention to measure CSE changes. Short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI), intracortical facilitation (ICF), and long interval facilitation (LIF) were assessed via paired-pulse TMS protocols.

RESULTS

A-tDCS significantly increased CSE as expected at stimulation durations of 22 and 24 min. However, this effect of a-tDCS on CSE decreased and even reversed when stimulation duration increased to 26, 28, and 30 min. Respective alterations of ICF, LIF, and SICI indicate the involvement of glutamatergic, and GABAergic systems in these effects.

CONCLUSIONS

These results confirm a duration threshold for reversal of the excitability-enhancing effect of a-tDCS with stimulation durations ≥ 26 min. Counter-regulatory mechanisms are discussed as a mechanistic foundation for these effects, which might prevent excessive brain activation.

Searching for the optimal tDCS target for motor rehabilitation

BACKGROUND

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been investigated over the years due to its short and also long-term effects on cortical excitability and neuroplasticity. Although its mechanisms to improve motor function are not fully understood, this technique has been suggested as an alternative therapeutic method for motor rehabilitation, especially those with motor function deficits. When applied to the primary motor cortex, tDCS has shown to improve motor function in healthy individuals, as well as in patients with neurological disorders. Based on its potential effects on motor recovery, identifying optimal targets for tDCS stimulation is essential to improve knowledge regarding neuromodulation as well as to advance the use of tDCS in clinical motor rehabilitation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Therefore, this review discusses the existing evidence on the application of four different tDCS montages to promote and enhance motor rehabilitation: (1) anodal ipsilesional and cathodal contralesional primary motor cortex tDCS, (2) combination of central tDCS and peripheral electrical stimulation, (3) prefrontal tDCS montage and (4) cerebellar tDCS stimulation. Although there is a significant amount of data testing primary motor cortex tDCS for motor recovery, other targets and strategies have not been sufficiently tested. This review then presents the potential mechanisms and available evidence of these other tDCS strategies to promote motor recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

In spite of the large amount of data showing that tDCS is a promising adjuvant tool for motor rehabilitation, the diversity of parameters, associated with different characteristics of the clinical populations, has generated studies with heterogeneous methodologies and controversial results. The ideal montage for motor rehabilitation should be based on a patient-tailored approach that takes into account aspects related to the safety of the technique and the quality of the available evidence.

A modified Hodgkin-Huxley model to show the effect of motor cortex stimulation on the trigeminal neuralgia network

BACKGROUND

Trigeminal neuralgia (TN) is a severe neuropathic pain, which has an electric shock-like characteristic. There are some common treatments for this pain such as medicine, microvascular decompression or radio frequency. In this regard, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is another therapeutic method to reduce pain, which has been recently attracting the therapists' attention. The positive effect of tDCS on TN was shown in many previous studies. However, the mechanism of the tDCS effect has remained unclear.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to model the neuronal behavior of the main known regions of the brain participating in TN pathways to study the effect of transcranial direct current stimulation.

METHOD

The proposed model consists of several blocks: (1) trigeminal nerve, (2) trigeminal ganglion, (3) PAG (periaqueductal gray in the brainstem), (4) thalamus, (5) motor cortex (M1) and (6) somatosensory cortex (S1). Each of these components is represented by a modified Hodgkin-Huxley (HH) model. The modification of the HH model was done based on some neurological facts of pain sodium channels. The input of the model involves any stimuli to the 'trigeminal nerve,' which cause the pain, and the output is the activity of the somatosensory cortex. An external current, which is considered as an electrical current, was applied to the motor cortex block of the model.

RESULT

The results showed that by decreasing the conductivity of the slow sodium channels (pain channels) and applying tDCS over the M1, the activity of the somatosensory cortex would be reduced. This reduction can cause pain relief.

CONCLUSION

The proposed model provided some possible suggestions about the relationship between the effects of tDCS and associated components in TN, and also the relationship between the pain measurement index, somatosensory cortex activity, and the strength of tDCS.

Differential Effects of Unihemispheric Concurrent Dual-Site and Conventional tDCS on Motor Learning: A Randomized, Sham-Controlled Study

Introduction:

Based on the literature, unihemispheric concurrent dual-site anodal transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (a-tDCSUHCDS) of primary Motor cortex (M1) and Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex (DLPFC) would be more efficient than conventional a-tDCS of M1 to induce larger and longer-lasting M1 corticospinal excitability. The main objective of the present study was to compare the effects of a-tDCSUHCDS and conventional M1 a-tDCS on the extent and durability of the motor sequence acquisition in healthy individuals.

Methods:

In this randomized sham-controlled study, healthy volunteers were randomly divided into three groups: experimental (a-tDCSUHCDS), control (M1 a-tDCS), and sham stimulation groups. The participants practiced serial response time task over three consecutive days when they simultaneously received a-tDCS. Using the skill measure, we assessed motor learning up to 4 weeks after the completion of experimental conditions.

Results:

Data analysis revealed that all groups exhibited the improved trend over the training course (P<0.001). There were no significant differences in skill acquisition among groups at post-intervention (P>0.05), while a significant improvement was observed between experimental and sham group at the retention time (P<0.05). Moreover, there were no significant differences between the control and two other groups with regard to the retention time (P>0.05).

Conclusion:

These results revealed a significant increase in the skill acquisition by a-tDCSUHCDS technique with regard to retention issue, which could be a valuable finding in neuro-rehabilitation field.

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

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

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