Anodal tDCS over the Primary Motor Cortex Facilitates Long-Term Memory Formation Reflecting Use-Dependent Plasticity

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Anxiety During Laparoscopic Colorectal Cancer Surgery: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Perioperative anxiety is prevalent among patients undergoing surgical treatment of cancer and often influences their prognosis. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has shown potential in the treatment of various anxiety-related disorders, but data on the impact of tDCS on perioperative anxiety are limited.

Objective

To evaluate the effect of tDCS in reducing perioperative anxiety among patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal cancer (CRC) resection.

Design, Setting, And Participants

This randomized clinical trial was conducted from March to August 2023 at the Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University. Patients aged 18 years or older undergoing elective laparoscopic radical resection for CRC were randomly assigned to either the active tDCS group or the sham tDCS group. Intention-to-treat data analysis was performed in September 2023.

Interventions

Patients were randomly assigned to receive 2 sessions of either active tDCS or sham tDCS over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex on the afternoon of the day before the operation and in the morning of the day of operation.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The main outcome was the incidence of perioperative anxiety from the day of the operation up to 3 days after the procedure, as measured using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-Anxiety (HADS-A) subscale (range: 0-21, with higher scores indicating more anxiety). Secondary outcomes included postoperative delirium (assessed by the Confusion Assessment Method or Confusion Assessment Method intensive care unit scale); pain (assessed by the 10-point Numeric Rating Scale [NRS], with scores ranging from 0 [no pain] to 10 [worst pain]); frailty (assessed by the Fatigue, Resistance, Ambulation, Illness and Loss of Weight [FRAIL] Index, with scores ranging from 0 [most robust] to 5 [most frail]; and sleep quality (assessed by the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index [PSQI], with scores ranging from 0 to 21 and higher scores indicating worse sleep quality) after the 2 sessions of the tDCS intervention.

Results

A total of 196 patients (mean [SD] age, 63.5 [11.0] years; 124 [63.3%] men) were recruited and randomly assigned to the active tDCS group (98 patients) or the sham tDCS group (98 patients). After the second tDCS intervention on the day of the operation, the incidence of perioperative anxiety was 38.8% in the active tDCS group and 70.4% in the sham tDCS group (relative risk, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.42-0.73]; P < .001). Patients in the active tDCS group vs the sham tDCS group were less likely to have postoperative delirium (8.2% vs 25.5%) and, at 3 days after the operation, had lower median (IQR) pain scores (NRS, 1.0 [1.0-1.0] vs 2.0 [2.0-2.0]), better median (IQR) sleep quality scores (PSQI, 10.5 [10.0-11.0] vs 12.0 [11.0-13.0]), and lower median (IQR) FRAIL Index (2.0 [1.0-2.0] vs 2.0 [2.0-3.0]).

Conclusions and Relevance

Findings of this randomized clinical trial indicate that administration of 2 preoperative sessions of tDCS was associated with a decreased incidence of perioperative anxiety in patients undergoing elective CRC resection. Active tDCS was also associated with better anxiety scores, pain levels, and sleep quality as well as reduced postoperative delirium and frailty. The findings suggest that tDCS may be a novel strategy for improving perioperative anxiety in patients undergoing CRC resection.

Trial Registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Register Identifier: ChiCTR2300068859.

Efficacy analysis of three brain stimulation techniques for Alzheimer's disease: a meta-analysis of repeated transcranial magnetic stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation, and deep brain stimulation

INTRODUCTION

This systematic review and meta-analysis study investigates the efficacy of repeated transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), and deep brain stimulation (DBS) using neuropsychological assessments as a potential treatment option for Alzheimer's disease (AD).

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies on rTMS, tDCS, and DBS for the treatment of patients with AD between April 1970 and October 2022. The mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and AD Assessment Scale - Cognitive Subscale (ADAS-Cog) were adopted as the efficacy index.

RESULTS

The analysis yielded 17 eligible studies. rTMS greatly improved the cognition of patients with AD (immediate post-treatment WMD of MMSE score: 2.06, p < 0.00001; short-term follow-up WMD of MMSE score: 2.12, p = 0.006; WMD of ADAS-Cog score in single-arm studies: -4.97, p = 0.001). DBS did not reverse the progression of cognitive decline (WMD of ADAS-Cog score in single-arm studies: 7.40, p < 0.00001). Furthermore, tDCS demonstrated no significant efficacy in improving cognition in random clinical trials or single-arm studies.

CONCLUSION

rTMS is a promising non-medicinal alternative for cognitive improvement inpatients with AD.

Transcranial burst electrical stimulation contributes to neuromodulatory effects in the rat motor cortex

Background and objective

Transcranial Burst Electrical Stimulation (tBES) is an innovative non-invasive brain stimulation technique that combines direct current (DC) and theta burst stimulation (TBS) for brain neuromodulation. It has been suggested that the tBES protocol may efficiently induce neuroplasticity. However, few studies have systematically tested neuromodulatory effects and underlying neurophysiological mechanisms by manipulating the polarity of DC and TBS patterns. This study aimed to develop the platform and assess neuromodulatory effects and neuronal activity changes following tBES.

Methods

Five groups of rats were exposed to anodal DC combined with intermittent TBS (tBES+), cathodal DC combined with continuous TBS (tBES-), anodal and cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS+ and tDCS-), and sham groups. The neuromodulatory effects of each stimulation on motor cortical excitability were analyzed by motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) changes. We also investigated the effects of tBES on both excitatory and inhibitory neural biomarkers. We specifically examined c-Fos and glutamic acid decarboxylase (GAD-65) using immunohistochemistry staining techniques. Additionally, we evaluated the safety of tBES by analyzing glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) expression.

Results

Our findings demonstrated significant impacts of tBES on motor cortical excitability up to 30 min post-stimulation. Specifically, MEPs significantly increased after tBES (+) compared to pre-stimulation (p = 0.026) and sham condition (p = 0.025). Conversely, tBES (-) led to a notable decrease in MEPs relative to baseline (p = 0.04) and sham condition (p = 0.048). Although tBES showed a more favorable neuromodulatory effect than tDCS, statistical analysis revealed no significant differences between these two groups (p > 0.05). Additionally, tBES (+) exhibited a significant activation of excitatory neurons, indicated by increased c-Fos expression (p < 0.05), and a reduction in GAD-65 density (p < 0.05). tBES (-) promoted GAD-65 expression (p < 0.05) while inhibiting c-Fos activation (p < 0.05), suggesting the involvement of cortical inhibition with tBES (-). The expression of GFAP showed no significant difference between tBES and sham conditions (p > 0.05), indicating that tBES did not induce neural injury in the stimulated regions.

Conclusion

Our study indicates that tBES effectively modulates motor cortical excitability. This research significantly contributes to a better understanding of the neuromodulatory effects of tBES, and could provide valuable evidence for its potential clinical applications in treating neurological disorders.

Impact of twice-a-day transcranial direct current stimulation intervention on cognitive function and motor cortex plasticity in patients with Alzheimer's disease

Background

Non-invasive brain stimulation has improved cognitive functions in patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD), and some studies suggest a close relationship between cognition and plasticity. However, the clinical benefits of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in patients still need to be evaluated.

Aims

This study examined the role of tDCS in improving cognition and whether the improved cognition is related to altered cortical plasticity.

Methods

124 patients with AD were randomly assigned to active tDCS (n=63) or sham tDCS (n=61). The tDCS was applied at the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex for 30 treatment sessions across 6 weeks (5 days per week, 2 days off). The Mini-Mental State Examination and the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive (ADAS-Cog) were used for cognition evaluation at baseline, week 2 and week 6. The cortical plasticity was represented by motor-evoked potential (MEP) measured with an electromyogram.

Results

The results showed that multiple courses of active tDCS can improve the cognitive functions of patients with AD, especially in the memory domain (word recall, recall of test instructions and word recognition). In addition, the damaged MEP level was enhanced following active treatment. In the active tDCS group, the improvements in ADAS-Cog total and subitem (word recall and word recognition) scores were negatively correlated with the enhancement of MEP.

Conclusions

Our research indicates for the first time that twice-a-day tDCS may improve the cognitive function of patients with AD. This study also suggests that cognitive dysfunction may be related to impaired cortical plasticity, which warrants mechanistic investigations of the relationship between cognition and plasticity in the future.

Trial registration number

ChiCTR1900021067.

Adjunctive transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) plus sodium benzoate for the treatment of early-phase Alzheimer's disease: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Previous studies found that an NMDA receptor (NMDAR) enhancer, sodium benzoate, improved cognitive function of patients with early-phase Alzheimer's disease (AD). Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) induces NMDAR-dependent synaptic plasticity and strengthens cognitive function of AD patients. This study aimed to evaluate efficacy and safety of tDCS plus benzoate in early-phase dementia. In this 24-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 97 patients with early-phase AD received 10-session tDCS during the first 2 weeks. They then took benzoate or placebo for 24 weeks. We assessed the patients using Alzheimer's disease assessment scale - cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog), Clinician's Interview-Based Impression of Change plus Caregiver Input, Mini Mental Status Examination, Alzheimer's disease Cooperative Study scale for ADL in MCI, and a battery of additional cognitive tests. Forty-seven patients received sodium benzoate, and the other 50 placebo. The two treatment groups didn't differ significantly in ADAS-cog or other measures. Addition of benzoate to tDCS didn't get extra benefit or side effect in this study. For more thoroughly studying the potential of combining tDCS with benzoate in the AD treatment, future research should use other study designs, such as longer-term benzoate treatment, adding benzoate in the middle of tDCS trial sessions, or administering benzoate then tDCS.

Reinterpreting published tDCS results in terms of a cranial and cervical nerve co-stimulation mechanism

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive neuromodulation method that has been used to alter cognition in hundreds of experiments. During tDCS, a low-amplitude current is delivered via scalp electrodes to create a weak electric field in the brain. The weak electric field causes membrane polarization in cortical neurons directly under the scalp electrodes. It is generally assumed that this mechanism causes the observed effects of tDCS on cognition. However, it was recently shown that some tDCS effects are not caused by the electric field in the brain but rather via co-stimulation of cranial and cervical nerves in the scalp that also have neuromodulatory effects that can influence cognition. This peripheral nerve co-stimulation mechanism is not controlled for in tDCS experiments that use the standard sham condition. In light of this new evidence, results from previous tDCS experiments could be reinterpreted in terms of a peripheral nerve co-stimulation mechanism. Here, we selected six publications that reported tDCS effects on cognition and attributed the effects to the electric field in the brain directly under the electrode. We then posed the question: given the known neuromodulatory effects of cranial and cervical nerve stimulation, could the reported results also be understood in terms of tDCS peripheral nerve co-stimulation? We present our re-interpretation of these results as a way to stimulate debate within the neuromodulation field and as a food-for-thought for researchers designing new tDCS experiments.

Primary outcome from the augmenting cognitive training in older adults study (ACT): A tDCS and cognitive training randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

There is a need for effective interventions to stave off cognitive decline in older adults. Cognitive training has variably produced gains in untrained tasks and daily functioning. Combining cognitive training with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) may augment cognitive training effects; however, this approach has yet to be tested on a large-scale.

OBJECTIVE

This paper will present the primary findings of the Augmenting Cognitive Training in Older Adults (ACT) clinical trial. We hypothesize that receiving active stimulation with cognitive training will result in greater improvements on an untrained fluid cognition composite compared to sham following intervention.

METHODS

379 older adults were randomized, and 334 were included in intent-to-treat analyses for a 12-week multidomain cognitive training and tDCS intervention. Active or sham tDCS was administered at F3/F4 during cognitive training daily for two weeks then weekly for 10 weeks. To assess the tDCS effect, we fitted regression models for changes in NIH Toolbox Fluid Cognition Composite scores immediately following intervention and one year from baseline controlling for covariates and baseline scores.

RESULTS

Across the entire sample, there were improvements in NIH Toolbox Fluid Cognition Composite scores immediately post-intervention and one year following baseline; however, there were no significant tDCS group effects at either timepoint.

CONCLUSIONS

The ACT study models rigorous, safe administration of a combined tDCS and cognitive training intervention in a large sample of older adults. Despite potential evidence of near-transfer effects, we failed to demonstrate an additive benefit of active stimulation. Future analyses will continue to assess the intervention's efficacy by examining additional measures of cognition, functioning, mood, and neural markers.

Transcranial direct current stimulation for bipolar depression: systematic reviews of clinical evidence and biological underpinnings

Despite multiple available treatments for bipolar depression (BD), many patients face sub-optimal responses. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been advocated in the management of different conditions, including BD, especially in treatment-resistant cases. The optimal dose and timing of tDCS, the mutual influence with other concurrently administered interventions, long-term efficacy, overall safety, and biological underpinnings nonetheless deserve additional assessment. The present study appraised the existing clinical evidence about tDCS for bipolar depression, delving into the putative biological underpinnings with a special emphasis on cellular and molecular levels, with the ultimate goal of providing a translational perspective on the matter. Two separate systematic reviews across the PubMed database since inception up to August 8^th 2022 were performed, with fourteen clinical and nineteen neurobiological eligible studies. The included clinical studies encompass 207 bipolar depression patients overall and consistently document the efficacy of tDCS, with a reduction in depression scores after treatment ranging from 18% to 92%. The RCT with the largest sample clearly showed a significant superiority of active stimulation over sham. Mild-to-moderate and transient adverse effects are attributed to tDCS across these studies. The review of neurobiological literature indicates that several molecular mechanisms may account for the antidepressant effect of tDCS in BD patients, including the action on calcium homeostasis in glial cells, the enhancement of LTP, the regulation of neurotrophic factors and inflammatory mediators, and the modulation of the expression of plasticity-related genes. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study on the matter to concurrently provide a synthesis of the clinical evidence and an in-depth appraisal of the putative biological underpinnings, providing consistent support for the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of tDCS.

Effects of neurofeedback training combined with transcranial direct current stimulation on motor imagery: A randomized controlled trial

Introduction

Neurofeedback (NFB) training and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) have been shown to individually improve motor imagery (MI) abilities. However, the effect of combining both of them with MI has not been verified. Therefore, the aim of this study was to examine the effect of applying tDCS directly before MI with NFB.

Methods

Participants were divided into an NFB group (n = 10) that performed MI with NFB and an NFB + tDCS group (n = 10) that received tDCS for 10 min before MI with NFB. Both groups performed 60 MI trials with NFB. The MI task was performed 20 times without NFB before and after training, and μ-event-related desynchronization (ERD) and vividness MI were evaluated.

Results

μ-ERD increased significantly in the NFB + tDCS group compared to the NFB group. MI vividness significantly increased before and after training.

Discussion

Transcranial direct current stimulation and NFB modulate different processes with respect to MI ability improvement; hence, their combination might further improve MI performance. The results of this study indicate that the combination of NFB and tDCS for MI is more effective in improving MI abilities than applying them individually.

Tuning brain networks: The emerging role of transcranial direct current stimulation on structural plasticity

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation technique (NIBS) that has been proven to promote beneficial effects in a range of neurological and psychiatric disorders. Unfortunately, although has been widely investigated, the mechanism comprehension around tDCS effects presents still some gaps. Therefore, scientists are still trying to uncover the cellular and molecular mechanisms behind its positive effects to permit a more suitable application. Experimental models have provided converging evidence that tDCS elicits improvements in learning and memory by modulating both excitability and synaptic plasticity in neurons. Recently, among tDCS neurobiological effects, neural synchronization and dendritic structural changes have been reported in physiological and pathological conditions, suggesting possible effects at the neuronal circuit level. In this review, we bring in to focus the emerging effects of tDCS on the structural plasticity changes and neuronal rewiring, with the intent to match these two aspects with the underpinning molecular mechanisms identified so far, providing a new perspective to work on to unveil novel tDCS therapeutic use to treat brain dysfunctions.

Advances in targeting central sensitization and brain plasticity in chronic pain

Maladaptation in sensory neural plasticity of nociceptive pathways is associated with various types of chronic pain through central sensitization and remodeling of brain connectivity. Within this context, extensive research has been conducted to evaluate the mechanisms and efficacy of certain non-pharmacological pain treatment modalities. These include neurostimulation, virtual reality, cognitive therapy and rehabilitation. Here, we summarize the involved mechanisms and review novel findings in relation to nociceptive desensitization and modulation of plasticity for the management of intractable chronic pain and prevention of acute-to-chronic pain transition.

Effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Combined With Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation on Upper Extremity Motor Function in Patients With Stroke

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to investigate the treatment effects of transcranial direct current stimulation combined with neuromuscular electrical stimulation on the motor function of upper extremity in persons with stroke.

DESIGN

This study was a pilot double-blind randomized controlled trial. Twenty-six patients due to stroke onset of more than 6 mos were randomly allocated to three groups: transcranial direct current stimulation combined with neuromuscular electrical stimulation group, transcranial direct current stimulation group, or control group. In addition to conventional rehabilitation, all subjects received one of the three protocols in a total of 15 sessions for 3 wks.

RESULTS

A significant difference among the three groups was found for the change scores of the Fugl-Meyer Assessment upper extremity subscale from pretreatment to 1-mo follow-up (P = 0.02), in favor of the transcranial direct current stimulation combined with neuromuscular electrical stimulation group. Moreover, the transcranial direct current stimulation combined with neuromuscular electrical stimulation group showed significant within-group improvement on the Fugl-Meyer Assessment upper extremity (from preintervention to postintervention, P = 0.01) and the Action Research Arm Test (from preintervention to postintervention and to 1-mo postintervention, P = 0.03 and P = 0.04, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

This preliminary study reveals that combining transcranial direct current stimulation and neuromuscular electrical stimulation with regular rehabilitation programs may enhance better upper extremity functional improvement than regular rehabilitation programs alone in patients with chronic stroke.

Bilateral transcranial direct current stimulation attenuated symptoms of alcohol use disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Alcohol use disorder is one of the common substance use disorders leading to mental and health problems. Despite the potential positive effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on symptoms of various substance use disorder, how specific tDCS protocols effectively influence on individuals with alcohol use disorder is still controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigated beneficial effects of tDCS on symptoms of alcohol use disorder.

METHOD

Eighteen total studies met our inclusion criteria, and we used 25 total comparisons from the qualified studies for the data synthesis. We estimated effect sizes by quantifying changes in alcohol craving and consumption between active tDCS protocol and sham groups. In addition, three moderator variable analyses determined whether tDCS effects on symptoms of alcohol use disorder were different based on (a) bilateral versus unilateral tDCS protocols, (b) specific targeted regions, and (c) multiple sessions versus single session of tDCS protocols.

RESULTS

Random-effects model meta-analysis revealed small positive tDCS effects on alcohol craving and consumption. Specifically, bilateral tDCS protocols significantly reduced alcohol craving, and further anodal tDCS on right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) and cathodal tDCS on left DLPFC revealed significant positive effects. The multiple sessions of tDCS protocols showed better effects on reducing alcohol craving.

CONCLUSIONS

The current findings suggested that bilateral tDCS protocols including anodal tDCS on right DLPFC and cathodal tDCS on left DLPFC with multiple sessions may effectively improve tDCS effects on symptoms of alcohol use disorder.

Therapeutic Use of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in the Rehabilitation of Prolonged Disorders of Consciousness

Patients with Prolonged Disorders of Consciousness (PDOC) have catastrophic disabilities and very complex needs for care. Therapeutic options are very limited, and patients often show little functional improvement over time. Neuroimaging studies have demonstrated that a significant number of PDOC patients retain a high level of cognitive functioning, and in some cases even awareness, and are simply unable to show this with their external behavior - a condition known as cognitive-motor dissociation (CMD). Despite vast implications for diagnosis, the discovery of covert cognition in PDOC patients is not typically associated with a more favorable prognosis, and the majority of patients will remain in a permanent state of low responsiveness. Recently, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has attracted attention as a potential therapeutic tool in PDOC. Research to date suggests that tDCS can lead to clinical improvements in patients with a minimally conscious state (MCS), especially when administered over multiple sessions. While promising, the outcomes of these studies have been highly inconsistent, partially due to small sample sizes, heterogeneous methodologies (in terms of both tDCS parameters and outcome measures), and limitations related to electrode placement and heterogeneity of brain damage inherent to PDOC. In addition, we argue that neuroimaging and electrophysiological assessments may serve as more sensitive biomarkers to identify changes after tDCS that are not yet apparent behaviorally. Finally, given the evidence that concurrent brain stimulation and physical therapy can enhance motor rehabilitation, we argue that future studies should focus on the integration of tDCS with conventional rehabilitation programmes from the subacute phase of care onwards, to ascertain whether any synergies exist.

The Ties That Bind: Aberrant Plasticity and Networks Dysfunction in Movement Disorders-Implications for Rehabilitation

Background: Movement disorders encompass various conditions affecting the nervous system. The pathological processes underlying movement disorders lead to aberrant synaptic plastic changes, which in turn alter the functioning of large-scale brain networks. Therefore, clinical phenomenology does not only entail motor symptoms but also cognitive and motivational disturbances. The result is the disruption of motor learning and motor behavior. Due to this complexity, the responsiveness to standard therapies could be disappointing. Specific forms of rehabilitation entailing goal-based practice, aerobic training, and the use of noninvasive brain stimulation techniques could "restore" neuroplasticity at motor-cognitive circuitries, leading to clinical gains. This is probably associated with modulations occurring at both molecular (synaptic) and circuitry levels (networks). Several gaps remain in our understanding of the relationships among plasticity and neural networks and how neurorehabilitation could promote clinical gains is still unclear. Purposes: In this review, we outline first the networks involved in motor learning and behavior and analyze which mechanisms link the pathological synaptic plastic changes with these networks' disruption in movement disorders. Therefore, we provide theoretical and practical bases to be applied for treatment in rehabilitation.

Preliminary effects of prefrontal tDCS on dopamine-mediated behavior and psychophysiology

The ability to manipulate dopamine in vivo through non-invasive, reversible mechanisms has the potential to impact clinical, translational, and basic research. Recent PET studies have demonstrated increased dopamine release in the striatum after bifrontal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). We sought to extend this work by examining whether bifrontal tDCS could demonstrate an effect on behavioral and physiological correlates of subcortical dopamine activity. We conducted a preliminary between-subjects study (n = 30) with active and sham tDCS and used spontaneous eye blink rate (EBR), facial attractiveness ratings, and greyscales orienting bias as indirect proxies for dopamine functioning. The initial design and analyses were pre-registered (https://osf.io/gmnpc). Stimulation did not significantly affect any of the three measures, though effect sizes were often moderately large and were all in the predicted directions. Additional exploratory analyses suggested that stimulation's effect on EBR might depend on pre-stimulation dopamine levels. Our results suggest that larger samples than those that are standard in tDCS literature should be used to assess the effect of tDCS on dopamine using indirect measures. Further, exploratory results add to a growing body of work demonstrating the importance of accounting for individual differences in tDCS response.

The Effect of Parietal and Cerebellar Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Bimanual Coordinated Adaptive Motor Learning

Abstract. Many daily activities, such as typing, eating, playing the piano, and passing the ball in volleyball, require the proficient coordination of both hands. In this study, the effects of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (atDCS) on the acquisition, retention, and transfer of bimanual adaptive motor tasks were investigated. To this end, 64 volunteers ( Mage = 24.36 years; SD = 2.51; 16 females) participated in this double-blind study and were categorized randomly into 4 groups. During the pretest, posttest, 24-h and 48-h retention, and transfer tests, two forms of bimanual coordination (BC) of the Vienna test system were performed. Between the pretest and posttest, all participants were trained in a bimanual coordination adaptive task with concurrent brain stimulation (1.5 mA for 15 min) for two consecutive days. The first experimental group (parietal-stim) received atDCS over the right parietal cortex (P4), while the second experimental group (cerebellar-stim) received atDCS over the bilateral cerebellum (2.5 cm bilateral to the inion). The third group (sham) received a sham stimulation. Finally, the control group did not receive any stimulation at all (control). Repeated-measure analysis of variance (ANOVARM) results indicated that parietal tDCS affected motor performance in the posttest, while overall mean duration and overall error mean duration of movement decreased. The results also revealed a significant impact of cerebellar tDCS on the posttest, 24-h and 48-h retention, and transfer tests. The overall mean duration and overall error mean durations of movement in this group were significantly lower than those in the other groups. Accordingly, we found evidence that atDCS over the cerebellum leads to more improvement in motor performance and transfer in a bimanual coordination task than atDCS over the right parietal. Finally, these results point to the possibly beneficial application of atDCS for learning and recovery of bimanual motor skills, especially when subjects are faced with a new challenging situation.

The Effects of Transcranial Electrical Stimulation of the Brain on Sleep: A Systematic Review

Transcranial Electrical Stimulation (tES) is a promising non-invasive brain modulation tool. Over the past years, there have been several attempts to modulate sleep with tES-based approaches in both the healthy and pathological brains. However, data about the impact on measurable aspects of sleep remain scattered between studies, which prevent us from drawing firm conclusions. We conducted a systematic review of studies that explored the impact of tES on neurophysiological sleep oscillations, sleep patterns measured objectively with polysomnography, and subjective psychometric assessments of sleep in both healthy and clinical samples. We searched four main electronic databases to identify studies until February 2020. Forty studies were selected including 511 healthy participants and 452 patients. tES can modify endogenous brain oscillations during sleep. Results concerning changes in sleep patterns are conflicting, whereas subjective assessments show clear improvements after tES. Possible stimulation-induced mechanisms within specific cortico-subcortical sleep structures and networks are discussed. Although these findings cannot be directly transferred to the clinical practice and sleep-enhancing devices development for healthy populations, they might help to pave the way for future researches in these areas. PROSPERO registration number 178910.

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

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

Noninvasive neurostimulation of left ventral motor cortex enhances sensorimotor adaptation in speech production

Sensorimotor adaptation-enduring changes to motor commands due to sensory feedback-allows speakers to match their articulations to intended speech acoustics. How the brain integrates auditory feedback to modify speech motor commands and what limits the degree of these modifications remain unknown. Here, we investigated the role of speech motor cortex in modifying stored speech motor plans. In a within-subjects design, participants underwent separate sessions of sham and anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over speech motor cortex while speaking and receiving altered auditory feedback of the first formant. Anodal tDCS increased the rate of sensorimotor adaptation for feedback perturbation. Computational modeling of our results using the Directions Into Velocities of Articulators (DIVA) framework of speech production suggested that tDCS primarily affected behavior by increasing the feedforward learning rate. This study demonstrates how focal noninvasive neurostimulation can enhance the integration of auditory feedback into speech motor plans.

Multiple Motor Learning Processes in Humans: Defining Their Neurophysiological Bases

Learning new motor behaviors or adjusting previously learned actions to account for dynamic changes in our environment requires the operation of multiple distinct motor learning processes, which rely on different neuronal substrates. For instance, humans are capable of acquiring new motor patterns via the formation of internal model representations of the movement dynamics and through positive reinforcement. In this review, we will discuss how changes in human physiological markers, assessed with noninvasive brain stimulation techniques from distinct brain regions, can be utilized to provide insights toward the distinct learning processes underlying motor learning. We will summarize the findings from several behavioral and neurophysiological studies that have made efforts to understand how distinct processes contribute to and interact when learning new motor behaviors. In particular, we will extensively review two types of behavioral processes described in human sensorimotor learning: (1) a recalibration process of a previously learned movement and (2) acquiring an entirely new motor control policy, such as learning to play an instrument. The selected studies will demonstrate in-detail how distinct physiological mechanisms contributions change depending on the time course of learning and the type of behaviors being learned.

Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on cognition and symptoms in Chinese patients with schizophrenia✰

There is preliminary evidence that transcranial direct current stimulation(tDCS) may improve symptoms and cognitive function in schizophrenia, but the generalizability of these results needs further investigation. We present a study of the effects of active vs. sham tDCS on cognition and symptoms in a sample of 45 Chinese patients with schizophrenia who showed significant cognitive deficits and were treated for 10 sessions with active or sham tDCS. Psychiatric symptoms were assessed by PANSS scores, and cognitive symptoms assessed by MATRICS battery and other tests. There were no differences between cognitive or symptom scores between subjects treated with active vs. sham tDCS tested within 1-2 days after the end of the 10th session. However, two weeks later subjects treated with active tDCS showed significantly more improvements on MATRICS Speed of Processing domain. MATRICS Overall Composite and a CogState measure related to accuracy on a 1-back working memory task were improved at two weeks in statistical tests without multiple corrections. The improvement in cognitive test scores 2 weeks after the last tDCS session, suggests longer term effects may be related to changes in neuroplasticity induced by 10 sessions of tDCS. The lack of significant changes in cognition shortly after the completion of 10 tDCS sessions contrasts with our earlier positive findings in U.S. patients with schizophrenia.

Differences in high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation over the motor hotspot versus the premotor cortex on motor network excitability

The effectiveness of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) placed over the motor hotspot (thought to represent the primary motor cortex (M1)) to modulate motor network excitability is highly variable. The premotor cortex-particularly the dorsal premotor cortex (PMd)-may be a promising alternative target to reliably modulate motor excitability, as it influences motor control across multiple pathways, one independent of M1 and one with direct connections to M1. This double-blind, placebo-controlled preliminary study aimed to differentially excite motor and premotor regions using high-definition tDCS (HD-tDCS) with concurrent functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). HD-tDCS applied over either the motor hotspot or the premotor cortex demonstrated high inter-individual variability in changes on cortical motor excitability. However, HD-tDCS over the premotor cortex led to a higher number of responders and greater changes in local fMRI-based complexity than HD-tDCS over the motor hotspot. Furthermore, an analysis of individual motor hotspot anatomical locations revealed that, in more than half of the participants, the motor hotspot is not located over anatomical M1 boundaries, despite using a canonical definition of the motor hotspot. This heterogeneity in stimulation site may contribute to the variability of tDCS results. Altogether, these preliminary findings provide new considerations to enhance tDCS reliability.

The Impact of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Upper-Limb Motor Performance in Healthy Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has previously been reported to improve facets of upper limb motor performance such as accuracy and strength. However, the magnitude of motor performance improvement has not been reviewed by contemporaneous systematic review or meta-analysis of sham vs. active tDCS.

Objective: To systematically review and meta-analyse the existing evidence regarding the benefits of tDCS on upper limb motor performance in healthy adults.

Methods: A systematic search was conducted to obtain relevant articles from three databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO) yielding 3,200 abstracts. Following independent assessment by two reviewers, a total of 86 articles were included for review, of which 37 were deemed suitable for meta-analysis.

Results: Meta-analyses were performed for four outcome measures, namely: reaction time (RT), execution time (ET), time to task failure (TTF), and force. Further qualitative review was performed for accuracy and error. Statistically significant improvements in RT (effect size −0.01; 95% CI −0.02 to 0.001, p = 0.03) and ET (effect size −0.03; 95% CI −0.05 to −0.01, p = 0.017) were demonstrated compared to sham. In exercise tasks, increased force (effect size 0.10; 95% CI 0.08 to 0.13, p < 0.001) and a trend towards improved TTF was also observed.

Conclusions: This meta-analysis provides evidence attesting to the impact of tDCS on upper limb motor performance in healthy adults. Improved performance is demonstrable in reaction time, task completion time, elbow flexion tasks and accuracy. Considerable heterogeneity exists amongst the literature, further confirming the need for a standardised approach to reporting tDCS studies.

Transcranial direct current stimulation to enhance athletic performance outcome in experienced bodybuilders

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is currently under investigation as a promising technique for enhancement of athletic performance through modulating cortical excitability. Through consecutive randomization, 12 experienced bodybuilders were randomly assigned to two arms receiving either sham or real tDCS over the primary motor cortex (leg area) and left temporal cortex (T3) for 13 minutes in the first session. After 72 hours, both groups received the inverse stimulation. After the brain stimulation, cerebral hemodynamic response (using frontopolar hemoencephalography) was examined upon taking three computer-based cognitive tasks i.e. reasoning, memory and verbal ability using the Cambridge Brain Science-Cognitive Platform. Subsequently, the bodybuilders performed knee extension exercise while performance indicators including one-repetition maximum (1RM), muscular endurance (SEI), heart rate (ECG), motivation (VAS), surface electromyography over quadriceps femoris muscle (sEMG) and perceived exertion (RPE) were evaluated. The real tDCS vs. sham group showed decreased RPE and HR mean scores by 14.2% and 4.9%, respectively. Regarding muscular strength, endurance, and electrical activity, the 1RM, SEI, and sEMG factors improved by 4.4%, 16.9%, and % 5.8, respectively. Meanwhile, compared to sham, real tDCS did not affect the athletes’ motivation. Incidentally, it turned out that subjects who underwent T3 anodal stimulation outperformed in memory (p = 0.02) and verbal functions (0.02) as well as their corresponding frontopolar hemodynamic response [(memory HEG (p = 0.001) and verbal HEG (p = 0.003)]. Our findings suggest that simultaneous tDCS-induced excitation over the M1 leg area and left temporal area may potentially improve the overall athletic performance in experienced bodybuilders (Trial registration: IRCT20181104041543N1, Registered on 4 Nov. 2018, retrospectively registered).

Combining reward and M1 transcranial direct current stimulation enhances the retention of newly learnt sensorimotor mappings

Background

Reward-based feedback given during motor learning has been shown to improve the retention of the behaviour being acquired. Interestingly, applying transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) during learning over the primary motor cortex (M1), an area associated with motor retention, also results in enhanced retention of the newly formed motor memories. However, it remains unknown whether combining these distinct interventions result in an additive benefit of motor retention.

Methods

We investigated whether combining both interventions while participants learned to account for a visuomotor transformation results in enhanced motor retention (total n = 56; each group n = 14). To determine whether these interventions share common physiological mechanisms underpinning learning, we assessed motor cortical excitability and inhibition (i.e. SICI) on a hand muscle before and after all participants learned the visuomotor rotation using their entire arm and hand.

Results

We found that both the Reward-Stim (i.e. reward + tDCS) and Reward-Sham (i.e. reward-only) groups had increased retention at the beginning of the retention phase, indicating an immediate effect of reward on behaviour. However, each intervention on their own did not enhance retention when compared to sham, but rather, only the combination of both reward and tDCS demonstrated prolonged retention. We also found that only the Reward-Stim group had a significant reduction in SICI after exposure to the perturbation.

Conclusions

We show that combining both interventions are additive in providing stronger retention of motor adaptation. These results indicate that the reliability and validity of using tDCS within a clinical context may depend on the type of feedback individuals receive when learning a new motor pattern.

•

Concurrently administering reward and M1 tDCS during learning results in enhanced motor retention.

•

The combination of these interventions also leads to a reduction in M1 inhibitory mechanisms.

•

No benefits of motor retention were found when reward or M1 tDCS were given alone.

Direction of TDCS current flow in human sensorimotor cortex influences behavioural learning

Background

Recent studies have shown that neurophysiological outcomes of transcranial direct current stimulation (TDCS) are influenced by current flow in brain regions between the electrodes, and in particular the orientation of current flow relative to the cortical surface.

Objective

We asked whether the directional effects of TDCS on physiological measures in the motor system would also be observed on motor behaviours.

Methods

We applied TDCS during the practice of a ballistic movement task to test whether it affected learning or the retention of learning 48 h later. TDCS electrodes were oriented perpendicular to the central sulcus and two current orientations were used (posterior-anterior, TDCS_PA; and anterior-posterior, TDCS_AP). Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) was used to assess whether changes in corticospinal excitability reflected any behavioural changes.

Results

Directional TDCS_AP impaired the retention of learning on the ballistic movement task compared to TDCS_PA and a sham condition. Although TDCS_PA had no effect on learning or retention, it blocked the typical increase in corticospinal excitability after a period of motor practice.

Conclusions

Our results extend on previous reports of TDCS producing directionally specific changes in neurophysiological outcomes by showing that current direction through a cortical target also impacts upon behavioural outcomes. In addition, changes in corticospinal excitability after a period of motor practice are not causally linked to behavioural learning.

•

TDCS current direction influences neurophysiological outcomes.

•

We show that it also influences behavioural outcomes.

•

Behavioural learning is not linked to changes in corticospinal excitability.

Crossover design in transcranial direct current stimulation studies on motor learning: potential pitfalls and difficulties in interpretation of findings

Crossover designs are used by a high proportion of studies investigating the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on motor learning. These designs necessitate attention to aspects of data collection and analysis to take account of design-related confounds including order, carryover, and period effects. In this systematic review, we appraised the method sections of crossover-designed tDCS studies of motor learning and discussed the strategies adopted to address these factors. A systematic search of 10 databases was performed and 19 research papers, including 21 experimental studies, were identified. Potential risks of bias were addressed in all of the studies, however, not in a rigorous and structured manner. In the data collection phase, unclear methods of randomization, various lengths of washout period, and inconsistency in the counteracting period effect can be observed. In the analytical procedures, the stratification by sequence group was often ignored, and data were treated as if it belongs to a simple repeated-measures design. An inappropriate use of crossover design can seriously affect the findings and therefore the conclusions drawn from tDCS studies on motor learning. The results indicate a pressing need for the development of detailed guidelines for this type of studies to benefit from the advantages of a crossover design.

Differential Effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) Depending on Previous Musical Training

Previous studies have shown that transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) facilitates motor performance, but individual differences such as baseline performance seem to influence this effect. Accordingly, musicians offer an inter-individual differences model due to anatomical and functional variances displayed among the motor cortex regions. The aim of the present work was to study if the baseline motor skill predicts whether tDCS can enhance motor learning. For that objective, we administered anodal (n = 20) or sham (n = 20) tDCS on the right primary motor cortex region of 40 right-handed healthy participants, who were divided into four groups: musicians (tDCS/sham) and non-musicians (tDCS/sham). We measured the skill index (SI) presented in the sequential finger-tapping task (SEQTAP) at baseline, during three 20 min/2 mA stimulation sessions, and in follow-up tests after 20 min and 8 days. Depending on the normality of the data distribution, statistical differences were estimated by ANOVA and Bonferroni post hoc test or Kruskal-Wallis and U Mann-Whitney. Results showed that musicians scored higher in baseline performance than non-musicians. The non-musicians who received tDCS scored higher than the sham group in the first and second stimulation session. This effect was extended to the 20 min and 8 days follow-up test. In musicians, there was no effect of tDCS. The present method seems to be suitable for the achievement of positive and consolidated tDCS effects on motor learning in inexperienced participants, but not in musicians. These data may have an implication for the rehabilitation of motor impairments, contributing to more individualized stimulation protocols.

Gene polymorphisms and response to transcranial direct current stimulation for auditory verbal hallucinations in schizophrenia

OBJECTIVE

Recent observations demonstrate a significant ameliorative effect of add-on transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on auditory verbal hallucinations (AVHs) in schizophrenia. Of the many SNPs, NRG1 rs35753505 and catechol-o-methyl transferase (COMT) rs4680 polymorphisms have shown to have a strong association with neuroplasticity effect in schizophrenia.

METHODS

Schizophrenia patients (n=32) with treatment resistant auditory hallucinations were administered with an add-on tDCS. The COMT (rs4680) and NRG1 (rs35753505) genotypes were determined. The COMT genotypes were categorised into Val group (GG; n=15) and Met group (GG/AG; n=17) and NRG1 genotypes were categorised into AA group (n=12) and AG/GG group (n=20).

RESULTS

The reduction in auditory hallucination sub-scale score was significantly affected by COMT-GG genotype [Time×COMT interaction: F(1,28)=10.55, p=0.003, ɳ2=0.27]. Further, COMT-GG effect was epistatically influenced by the co-occurrence of NRG1-AA genotype [Time×COMT×NRG1 interaction: F(1,28)=8.09, p=0.008, ɳ2=0.22]. Irrespective of genotype, females showed better tDCS response than males [Time×Sex interaction: F(1,21)=4.67, p=0.04, ɳ2=0.18].

CONCLUSION

COMT-GG and NRG1-AA genotypes aid the tDCS-induced improvement in AVHs in schizophrenia patients. Our preliminary observations need replication and further systematic research to understand the neuroplastic gene determinants that modulate the effect of tDCS.

Using animal models to improve the design and application of transcranial electrical stimulation in humans

Purpose of Review

Transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) is a non-invasive stimulation technique used for modulating brain function in humans. To help tES reach its full therapeutic potential, it is necessary to address a number of critical gaps in our knowledge. Here, we review studies that have taken advantage of animal models to provide invaluable insight about the basic science behind tES.

Recent Findings

Animal studies are playing a key role in elucidating the mechanisms implicated in tES, defining safety limits, validating computational models, inspiring new stimulation protocols, enhancing brain function and exploring new therapeutic applications.

Summary

Animal models provide a wealth of information that can facilitate the successful utilization of tES for clinical interventions in human subjects. To this end, tES experiments in animals should be carefully designed to maximize opportunities for applying discoveries to the treatment of human disease.

Preclinical to Clinical Translation of Studies of Transcranial Direct-Current Stimulation in the Treatment of Epilepsy: A Systematic Review

Epilepsy is a chronic brain syndrome characterized by recurrent seizures resulting from excessive neuronal discharges. Despite the development of various new antiepileptic drugs, many patients are refractory to treatment and report side effects. Non-invasive methods of brain stimulation, such as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), have been tested as alternative approaches to directly modulate the excitability of epileptogenic neural circuits. Although some pilot and initial clinical studies have shown positive results, there is still uncertainty regarding the next steps of investigation in this field. Therefore, we reviewed preclinical and clinical studies using the following framework: (1) preclinical studies that have been successfully translated to clinical studies, (2) preclinical studies that have failed to be translated to clinical studies, and (3) clinical findings that were not previously tested in preclinical studies. We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and SciELO (2002–2017) using the keywords “tDCS,” “epilepsy,” “clinical trials,” and “animal models.” Our initial search resulted in 64 articles. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, we screened 17 full-text articles to extract findings about the efficacy of tDCS, with respect to the therapeutic framework used and the resulting reduction in seizures and epileptiform patterns. We found that few preclinical findings have been translated into clinical research (number of sessions and effects on seizure frequency) and that most findings have not been tested clinically (effects of tDCS on status epilepticus and absence epilepsy, neuroprotective effects in the hippocampus, and combined use with specific medications). Finally, considering that clinical studies on tDCS have been conducted for several epileptic syndromes, most were not previously tested in preclinical studies (Rasmussen's encephalitis, drug resistant epilepsy, and hippocampal sclerosis-induced epilepsy). Overall, most studies report positive findings. However, it is important to underscore that a successful preclinical study may not indicate success in a clinical study, considering the differences highlighted herein. Although most studies report significant findings, there are still important insights from preclinical work that must be tested clinically. Understanding these factors may improve the evidence for the potential use of this technique as a clinical tool in the treatment of epilepsy.

Safety and feasibility of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) combined with sensorimotor retraining in chronic low back pain: a protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Chronic low back pain (LBP) is a common and costly health problem yet current treatments demonstrate at best, small effects. The concurrent application of treatments with synergistic clinical and mechanistic effects may improve outcomes in chronic LBP. This pilot trial aims to (1) determine the feasibility, safety and perceived patient response to a combined transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and sensorimotor retraining intervention in chronic LBP and (2) provide data to support a sample size calculation for a fully powered trial should trends of effectiveness be present.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A pilot randomised, assessor and participant-blind, sham-controlled trial will be conducted. Eighty participants with chronic LBP will be randomly allocated to receive either (1) active tDCS + sensorimotor retraining or (2) sham tDCS + sensorimotor retraining. tDCS (active or sham) will be applied to the primary motor cortex for 20 min immediately prior to 60 min of supervised sensorimotor retraining twice per week for 10 weeks. Participants in both groups will complete home exercises three times per week. Feasibility, safety, pain, disability and pain system function will be assessed immediately before and after the 10-week intervention. Analysis of feasibility and safety will be performed using descriptive statistics. Statistical analyses will be conducted based on intention-to-treat and per protocol and will be used to determine trends for effectiveness.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval has been gained from the institutional human research ethics committee (H10184). Written informed consent will be provided by all participants. Results from this pilot study will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12616000624482.

Disruption of M1 Activity during Performance Plateau Impairs Consolidation of Motor Memories

Upon exposure to a new sensorimotor relationship, motor behaviors iteratively change early in adaptation but eventually stabilize as adaptation proceeds. Behavioral work suggests that motor memory consolidation is initiated upon the attainment of asymptotic levels of performance. Separate lines of evidence point to a critical role of the primary motor cortex (M1) in consolidation. However, a causal relationship between M1 activity during asymptote and consolidation has yet to be demonstrated. The present study investigated this issue in male and female participants using single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to interfere with postmovement activity in M1 in two behavioral phases of a ramp-and-hold visuomotor adaptation paradigm. TMS was either provided after each trial of the ramp phase of adaptation when a gradual increase in the visuomotor rotation caused movements to be changing, or after each trial of the hold phase of adaptation when the rotation was held constant and movements tended to stabilize. Consolidation was assessed by measuring performance on the same task 24 h later. Results revealed that TMS did not influence adaptation to the new visuomotor relationship in either condition. Critically, however, TMS disruption of M1 activity selectively impaired consolidation of motor memories when it was provided during the hold phase of adaptation. This effect did not take place when TMS was delivered over adjacent dorsal premotor cortex or when motor behaviors in late adaptation were prevented from plateauing. Together, these data suggest that the impaired consolidation stemmed from interference with mechanisms of repetition-dependent plasticity in M1.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT The present work demonstrates that TMS disruption of M1 activity impairs the consolidation of motor memories selectively when performance reaches asymptotic levels during sensorimotor adaptation. These findings provide evidence for a causal contribution of M1 to motor memory formation when movements tend to repeat, likely through mechanisms of repetition-dependent plasticity.

Using a Multifaceted Approach to Working With Children Who Have Differences in Sensory Processing and Integration

Pediatric occupational therapy practitioners frequently provide interventions for children with differences in sensory processing and integration. Confusion exists regarding how best to intervene with these children and about how to describe and document methods. Some practitioners hold the misconception that Ayres Sensory Integration intervention is the only approach that can and should be used with this population. The issue is that occupational therapy practitioners must treat the whole client in varied environments; to do so effectively, multiple approaches to intervention often are required. This article presents a framework for conceptualizing interventions for children with differences in sensory processing and integration that incorporates multiple evidence-based approaches. To best meet the needs of the children and families seeking occupational therapy services, interventions must be focused on participation and should be multifaceted.

Transcranial direct current stimulation as a motor neurorehabilitation tool: an empirical review

The present review collects the most relevant empirical evidence available in the literature until date regarding the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on the human motor function. tDCS in a non-invasive neurostimulation technique that delivers a weak current through the brain scalp altering the cortical excitability on the target brain area. The electrical current modulates the resting membrane potential of a variety of neuronal population (as pyramidal and gabaergic neurons); raising or dropping the firing rate up or down, depending on the nature of the electrode and the applied intensity. These local changes additionally have shown long-lasting effects, evidenced by its promotion of the brain-derived neurotrophic factor. Due to its easy and safe application and its neuromodulatory effects, tDCS has attracted a big attention in the motor neurorehabilitation field among the last years. Therefore, the present manuscript updates the knowledge available about the main concept of tDCS, its practical use, safety considerations, and its underlying mechanisms of action. Moreover, we will focus on the empirical data obtained by studies regarding the application of tDCS on the motor function of healthy and clinical population, comprising motor deficiencies of a variety of pathologies as Parkinson's disease, stroke, multiple sclerosis and cerebral palsy, among others. Finally, we will discuss the main current issues and future directions of tDCS as a motor neurorehabilitation tool.

Variance in exposed perturbations impairs retention of visuomotor adaptation

Sensorimotor control requires an accurate estimate of the state of the body. The brain optimizes state estimation by combining sensory signals with predictions of the sensory consequences of motor commands using a forward model. Given that both sensory signals and predictions are uncertain (i.e., noisy), the brain optimally weights the relative reliance on each source of information during adaptation. In support, it is known that uncertainty in the sensory predictions influences the rate and generalization of visuomotor adaptation. We investigated whether uncertainty in the sensory predictions affects the retention of a new visuomotor relationship. This was done by exposing three separate groups to a visuomotor rotation whose mean was common at 15° counterclockwise but whose variance around the mean differed (i.e., SD of 0°, 3.2°, or 4.5°). Retention was assessed by measuring the persistence of the adapted behavior in a no-vision phase. Results revealed that mean reach direction late in adaptation was similar across groups, suggesting it depended mainly on the mean of exposed rotations and was robust to differences in variance. However, retention differed across groups, with higher levels of variance being associated with a more rapid reversion toward nonadapted behavior. A control experiment ruled out the possibility that differences in retention were accounted for by differences in success rates. Exposure to variable rotations may have increased the uncertainty in sensory predictions, making the adapted forward model more labile and susceptible to change or decay.NEW & NOTEWORTHY The brain predicts the sensory consequences of motor commands through a forward model. These predictions are subject to uncertainty. We use visuomotor adaptation and modulate uncertainty in the sensory predictions by manipulating the variance in exposed rotations. Results reveal that variance does not influence the final extent of adaptation but selectively impairs the retention of motor memories. These results suggest that a more uncertain forward model is more susceptible to change or decay.

Transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) for bipolar depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Bipolar disorder (BD) is a severe and recurrent brain disorder that can manifest in manic or depressive episodes. Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) has been proposed as a novel therapeutic modality for patients experiencing bipolar depression, for which standard treatments are often inefficient. While several studies have been conducted in this patient group, there has been no systematic review or meta-analysis that specifically examines bipolar depression. We aimed to address this gap in the literature and evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of tDCS in patients fulfilling DSM-IV-TR criteria for BD I, II, or BD not otherwise specified (NOS).

METHODS

We systematically searched the literature from April 2002 to November 2016 to identify relevant publications for inclusion in our systematic review and meta-analysis. Effect sizes for depression rating-scale scores were expressed as the standardized mean difference (SMD) before and after tDCS.

RESULTS

Thirteen of 382 identified studies met eligibility criteria for our systematic review. The meta-analysis included 46 patients from 7 studies with depression rating-scale scores pre- and post-tDCS. Parameters of tDCS procedures were heterogeneous. Depression scores decreased significantly with a medium effect size after acute-phase of treatment (SMD 0.71 [0.25-1.18], z=3.00, p=0.003) and at the furthest endpoint (SMD 1.27 [0.57-1.97], z=3.57, p=0.0004). Six cases of affective switching under tDCS treatment protocols were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Depressive symptoms respond to tDCS in patients with BD. Additional studies, and particularly randomized controlled trials, are needed to clarify the effectiveness of tDCS in bipolar depression, the frequency of tDCS-emergent hypomania/mania, and which tDCS modalities are most efficient.

Dysfunctions of the basal ganglia-cerebellar-thalamo-cortical system produce motor tics in Tourette syndrome

Motor tics are a cardinal feature of Tourette syndrome and are traditionally associated with an excess of striatal dopamine in the basal ganglia. Recent evidence increasingly supports a more articulated view where cerebellum and cortex, working closely in concert with basal ganglia, are also involved in tic production. Building on such evidence, this article proposes a computational model of the basal ganglia-cerebellar-thalamo-cortical system to study how motor tics are generated in Tourette syndrome. In particular, the model: (i) reproduces the main results of recent experiments about the involvement of the basal ganglia-cerebellar-thalamo-cortical system in tic generation; (ii) suggests an explanation of the system-level mechanisms underlying motor tic production: in this respect, the model predicts that the interplay between dopaminergic signal and cortical activity contributes to triggering the tic event and that the recently discovered basal ganglia-cerebellar anatomical pathway may support the involvement of the cerebellum in tic production; (iii) furnishes predictions on the amount of tics generated when striatal dopamine increases and when the cortex is externally stimulated. These predictions could be important in identifying new brain target areas for future therapies. Finally, the model represents the first computational attempt to study the role of the recently discovered basal ganglia-cerebellar anatomical links. Studying this non-cortex-mediated basal ganglia-cerebellar interaction could radically change our perspective about how these areas interact with each other and with the cortex. Overall, the model also shows the utility of casting Tourette syndrome within a system-level perspective rather than viewing it as related to the dysfunction of a single brain area.

Tourette syndrome is a neuropsychiatric disorder characterized by vocal and motor tics. Tics represent a cardinal symptom traditionally associated with a dysfunction of the basal ganglia leading to an excess of the dopamine neurotransmitter. This view gives a restricted clinical picture and limits therapeutic approaches because it ignores the influence of altered interactions between the basal ganglia and other brain areas. In this respect, recent evidence supports a more articulated framework where cerebellum and cortex are also involved in tic production. Building on these data, we propose a computational model of the basal ganglia-cerebellar-thalamo-cortical network to investigate the specific mechanisms underlying motor tic production. The model reproduces the results of recent experiments and suggests an explanation of the system-level processes underlying tic production. Moreover, it furnishes predictions related to the amount of tics generated when there are dysfunctions in the basal ganglia-cerebellar-thalamo-cortical circuits. These predictions could be important in identifying new brain target areas for future therapies based on a system-level view of Tourette syndrome.

tDCS for Memory Enhancement: Analysis of the Speculative Aspects of Ethical Issues

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a promising technology to enhance cognitive and physical performance. One of the major areas of interest is the enhancement of memory function in healthy individuals. The early arrival of tDCS on the market for lifestyle uses and cognitive enhancement purposes lead to the voicing of some important ethical concerns, especially because, to date, there are no official guidelines or evaluation procedures to tackle these issues. The aim of this article is to review ethical issues related to uses of tDCS for memory enhancement found in the ethics and neuroscience literature and to evaluate how realistic and scientifically well-founded these concerns are? In order to evaluate how plausible or speculative each issue is, we applied the methodological framework described by Racine et al. (2014) for “informed and reflective” speculation in bioethics. This framework could be succinctly presented as requiring: (1) the explicit acknowledgment of factual assumptions and identification of the value attributed to them; (2) the validation of these assumptions with interdisciplinary literature; and (3) the adoption of a broad perspective to support more comprehensive reflection on normative issues. We identified four major considerations associated with the development of tDCS for memory enhancement: safety, autonomy, justice and authenticity. In order to assess the seriousness and likelihood of harm related to each of these concerns, we analyzed the assumptions underlying the ethical issues, and the level of evidence for each of them. We identified seven distinct assumptions: prevalence, social acceptance, efficacy, ideological stance (bioconservative vs. libertarian), potential for misuse, long term side effects, and the delivery of complete and clear information. We conclude that ethical discussion about memory enhancement via tDCS sometimes involves undue speculation, and closer attention to scientific and social facts would bring a more nuanced analysis. At this time, the most realistic concerns are related to safety and violation of users’ autonomy by a breach of informed consent, as potential immediate and long-term health risks to private users remain unknown or not well defined. Clear and complete information about these risks must be provided to research participants and consumers of tDCS products or related services. Broader public education initiatives and warnings would also be worthwhile to reach those who are constructing their own tDCS devices.

Modulating Motor Learning through Transcranial Direct-Current Stimulation: An Integrative View

Motor learning consists of the ability to improve motor actions through practice playing a major role in the acquisition of skills required for high-performance sports or motor function recovery after brain lesions. During the last decades, it has been reported that transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS), consisting in applying weak direct current through the scalp, is able of inducing polarity-specific changes in the excitability of cortical neurons. This low-cost, painless and well-tolerated portable technique has found a wide-spread use in the motor learning domain where it has been successfully applied to enhance motor learning in healthy individuals and for motor recovery after brain lesion as well as in pathological states associated to motor deficits. The main objective of this mini-review is to offer an integrative view about the potential use of tDCS for human motor learning modulation. Furthermore, we introduce the basic mechanisms underlying immediate and long-term effects associated to tDCS along with important considerations about its limitations and progression in recent years.

Direct Current Stimulation Modulates LTP and LTD: Activity Dependence and Dendritic Effects

BACKGROUND

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been reported to improve various forms of learning in humans. Stimulation is often applied during training, producing lasting enhancements that are specific to the learned task. These learning effects are thought to be mediated by altered synaptic plasticity. However, the effects of DCS during the induction of endogenous synaptic plasticity remain largely unexplored.

OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS

Here we are interested in the effects of DCS applied during synaptic plasticity induction.

METHODS

To model endogenous plasticity we induced long-term potentiation (LTP) and depression (LTD) at Schaffer collateral synapses in CA1 of rat hippocampal slices. Anodal and cathodal DCS at 20 V/m were applied throughout plasticity induction in both apical and basal dendritic compartments.

RESULTS

When DCS was paired with concurrent plasticity induction, the resulting plasticity was biased towards potentiation, such that LTP was enhanced and LTD was reduced. Remarkably, both anodal and cathodal stimulation can produce this bias, depending on the dendritic location and type of plasticity induction. Cathodal DCS enhanced LTP in apical dendrites while anodal DCS enhanced LTP in basal dendrites. Both anodal and cathodal DCS reduced LTD in apical dendrites. DCS did not affect synapses that were weakly active or when NMDA receptors were blocked.

CONCLUSIONS

These results highlight the role of DCS as a modulator, rather than inducer of synaptic plasticity, as well as the dependence of DCS effects on the spatial and temporal properties of endogenous synaptic activity. The relevance of the present results to human tDCS should be validated in future studies.