Null Effects on Working Memory and Verbal Fluency Tasks When Applying Anodal tDCS to the Inferior Frontal Gyrus of Healthy Participants

Lack of effects of online HD-tDCS over the left or right DLPFC in an associative memory and metamemory monitoring task

Neuroimaging studies have shown that activity in the prefrontal cortex correlates with two critical aspects of normal memory functioning: retrieval of episodic memories and subjective "feelings-of-knowing" about our memory. Brain stimulation can be used to test the causal role of the prefrontal cortex in these processes, and whether the role differs for the left versus right prefrontal cortex. We compared the effects of online High-Definition transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (HD-tDCS) over the left or right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) compared to sham during a proverb-name associative memory and feeling-of-knowing task. There were no significant effects of HD-tDCS on either associative recognition or feeling-of-knowing performance, with Bayesian analyses showing moderate support for the null hypotheses. Despite past work showing effects of HD-tDCS on other memory and feeling-of-knowing tasks, and neuroimaging showing effects with similar tasks, these findings add to the literature of non-significant effects with tDCS. This work highlights the need to better understand factors that determine the effectiveness of tDCS, especially if tDCS is to have a successful future as a clinical intervention.

Executive functions in patients with bilateral and unilateral peripheral vestibular dysfunction

Previous research suggests that patients with peripheral vestibular dysfunction (PVD) suffer from nonspatial cognitive problems, including executive impairments. However, previous studies that assessed executive functions are conflicting, limited to single executive components, and assessments are confounded by other cognitive functions. We compared performance in a comprehensive executive test battery in a large sample of 83 patients with several conditions of PVD (34 bilateral, 29 chronic unilateral, 20 acute unilateral) to healthy controls who were pairwise matched to patients regarding age, sex, and education. We assessed basic and complex executive functions with validated neuropsychological tests. Patients with bilateral PVD performed worse than controls in verbal initiation and working memory span, while other executive functions were preserved. Patients with chronic unilateral PVD had equal executive performance as controls. Patients with acute unilateral PVD performed worse than controls in the exact same tests as patients with bilateral PVD (verbal initiation, working memory span); however, this effect in patients with acute PVD diminished after correcting for multiple comparisons. Hearing loss and affective disorders did not influence our results. Vestibular related variables (disease duration, symptoms, dizziness handicap, deafferentation degree, and compensation) did not predict verbal initiation or working memory span in patients with bilateral PVD. The results suggest that bilateral PVD not only manifests in difficulties when solving spatial tasks but leads to more general neurocognitive deficits. This understanding is important for multidisciplinary workgroups (e.g., neurotologists, neurologists, audiologists) that are involved in diagnosing and treating patients with PVD. We recommend screening patients with PVD for executive impairments and if indicated providing them with cognitive training or psychoeducational support.

Effects and safety of transcranial direct current stimulation on multiple health outcomes: an umbrella review of randomized clinical trials

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), which delivers a direct current to the brain, emerged as a non-invasive potential therapeutic in treating a range of neurological and neuropsychiatric disorders. However, a comprehensive quantitative evidence synthesis on the effects of tDCS on a broad range of mental illnesses is lacking. Here, we systematically assess the certainty of the effects and safety of tDCS on several health outcomes using an umbrella review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The methodological quality of each included original meta-analysis was assessed by the A Measurement Tool for Assessing Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR2), and the certainty of the evidence for each effect was evaluated with Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). We followed an a priori protocol (PROSPERO CRD42023458700). We identified 15 meta-analyses of RCTs (AMSTAR 2; high 3, moderate 3, and low 9) that included 282 original articles, covering 22 unique health endpoints across 22 countries and six continents. From meta-analyses of RCTs supported by very low to high certainty of evidence, it was found that tDCS improved symptoms related to post-stroke, including post-stroke depression scale score (equivalent standardized mean difference [eSMD], 1.61 [95% confidence level, 0.72-2.50]; GRADE=moderate), activities of daily living independence (7.04 [3.41-10.67]; GRADE=high), motor recovery of upper and lower extremity (upper extremity: 0.15 [0.06-0.24], GRADE=high; lower extremity: 0.10 [0.03-0.16], GRADE=high), swallowing performance (GRADE=low), and spasticity (GRADE=moderate). In addition, tDCS had treatment effects on symptoms of several neurological and neuropsychiatric disorders, including obsessive-compulsive disorder (0.81 [0.44-1.18]; GRADE=high), pain in fibromyalgia (GRADE=low), disease of consciousness (GRADE=low), insight score (GRADE=moderate) and working memory (0.34 [0.01-0.67]; GRADE=high) in schizophrenia, migraine-related pain (-1.52 [-2.91 to -0.13]; GRADE=high), attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (reduction in overall symptom severity: 0.24 [0.04-0.45], GRADE=low; reduction in inattention: 0.56 [0.02-1.11], GRADE=low; reduction in impulsivity: 0.28 [0.04-0.51], GRADE=low), depression (GRADE=low), cerebellar ataxia (GRADE=low), and pain (GRADE=very low). Importantly, tDCS induced an increased number of reported cases of treatment-emergent mania or hypomania (0.88 [0.62-1.13]; GRADE=moderate). We found varied levels of evidence for the effects of tDCS with multiple neurological and neuropsychiatric conditions, from very low to high certainty of evidence. tDCS was effective for people with stroke, obsessive-compulsive disorder, fibromyalgia, disease of consciousness, schizophrenia, migraine, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, depression, cerebellar ataxia, and pain. Therefore, these findings suggest the benefit of tDCS for several neurological and neuropsychiatric disorders; however, further studies are needed to understand the underlying mechanism and optimize its therapeutic potential.

TDCS over PPC or DLPFC does not improve visual working memory capacity

Non-invasive brain stimulation has been highlighted as a possible intervention to induce cognitive benefits, including on visual working memory (VWM). However, findings are inconsistent, possibly due to methodological issues. A recent high-profile study by Wang et al.1 reported that anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over posterior parietal cortex (PPC), but not over dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), selectively improved VWM capacity but not precision, especially at a high VWM load. Thus, in the current pre-registered conceptual replication study, we accounted for the key potential methodological issues in the original study and tested an adequate number of participants required to demonstrate the previously reported effects (n = 48 compared to n = 20). Participants underwent counterbalanced PPC, DLPFC and sham stimulation before completing 360 trials of a continuous orientation-reproduction task with a slight variation of task stimuli and setup. We found no evidence for the selective effect of PPC stimulation. Instead, our results showed that tDCS effects were absent regardless of stimulation region and VWM load, which was largely supported by substantial to strong Bayesian evidence. Therefore, our results challenge previously reported benefits of single-session anodal PPC-tDCS on VWM.

Null effect of anodal and cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on own- and other-race face recognition

Successful face recognition is important for social interactions and public security. Although some preliminary evidence suggests that anodal and cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) might modulate own- and other-race face identification, respectively, the findings are largely inconsistent. Hence, we examined the effect of both anodal and cathodal tDCS on the recognition of own- and other-race faces. Ninety participants first completed own- and other-race Cambridge Face Memory Test (CFMT) as baseline measurements. Next, they received either anodal tDCS, cathodal tDCS or sham stimulation and finally they completed alternative versions of the own- and other-race CFMT. No difference in performance, in terms of accuracy and reaction time, for own- and other-race face recognition between anodal tDCS, cathodal tDCS and sham stimulation was found. Our findings cast doubt upon the efficacy of tDCS to modulate performance in face identification tasks.

Template MRI scans reliably approximate individual and group-level tES and TMS electric fields induced in motor and prefrontal circuits

Background

Electric field (E-field) modeling is a valuable method of elucidating the cortical target engagement from transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and transcranial electrical stimulation (tES), but it is typically dependent on individual MRI scans. In this study, we systematically tested whether E-field models in template MNI-152 and Ernie scans can reliably approximate group-level E-fields induced in N = 195 individuals across 5 diagnoses (healthy, alcohol use disorder, tobacco use disorder, anxiety, depression).

Methods

We computed 788 E-field models using the CHARM-SimNIBS 4.0.0 pipeline with 4 E-field models per participant (motor and prefrontal targets for TMS and tES). We additionally calculated permutation analyses to determine the point of stability of E-fields to assess whether the 152 brains represented in the MNI-152 template is sufficient.

Results

Group-level E-fields did not significantly differ between the individual vs. MNI-152 template and Ernie scans for any stimulation modality or location (p > 0.05). However, TMS-induced E-field magnitudes significantly varied by diagnosis; individuals with generalized anxiety had significantly higher prefrontal and motor E-field magnitudes than healthy controls and those with alcohol use disorder and depression (p < 0.001). The point of stability for group-level E-field magnitudes ranged from 42 (motor tES) to 52 participants (prefrontal TMS).

Conclusion

MNI-152 and Ernie models reliably estimate group-average TMS and tES-induced E-fields transdiagnostically. The MNI-152 template includes sufficient scans to control for interindividual anatomical differences (i.e., above the point of stability). Taken together, using the MNI-152 and Ernie brains to approximate group-level E-fields is a valid and reliable approach.

Differential effects of remotely supervised transcranial direct current stimulation on recognition memory depending on task order

Background

Prior work has shown positive effects of High Definition transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS) over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) on semantic memory performance and metamemory monitoring accuracy. However, HD-tDCS requires setup by a trained researcher, which is not always feasible. Few studies have used remotely supervised (rs) tDCS in healthy populations, and remote supervision has strong practical benefits.

Objective/hypothesis

The goal of the current study was to test if previously shown effects of HD-tDCS over the left DLPFC on semantic memory performance and metamemory monitoring accuracy extended to conventional rs-tDCS, which is less focal than HD-tDCS, and to episodic memory and metamemory tasks.

Materials and methods

A total of 36 healthy participants completed 6 weeks of rs-tDCS sessions, with either active left or right anodal DLPFC stimulation, or sham. Participants completed semantic and episodic memory and metamemory tasks, which each lasted for three consecutive sessions, and session order was counterbalanced across participants.

Results

Overall, there were no main effects of rs-tDCS on metamemory monitoring accuracy or memory performance for either the semantic or the episodic tasks. However, there were effects of rs-tDCS that depended on the order of completing the episodic and semantic task sessions. When participants completed the semantic task sessions after the episodic task sessions, semantic recognition was greater in the left anodal DLPFC condition. In a parallel effect, when participants completed the episodic task sessions after the semantic task sessions, episodic recognition was greater in the right anodal DLPFC condition.

Conclusion

Prior experience with tDCS is a factor for effects of rs-tDCS on cognition. Additionally, the current experiment provides evidence for the feasibility of fully remotely supervised tDCS in healthy participants.

Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation for the Modulation of Aggressive Behavior-A Systematic Review of Randomized Sham-Controlled Studies

INTRO

Aggressive behavior represents a significant public health issue, with relevant social, political, and security implications. Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) techniques may modulate aggressive behavior through stimulation of the prefrontal cortex.

AIMS

To review research on the effectiveness of NIBS to alter aggression, discuss the main findings and potential limitations, consider the specifics of the techniques and protocols employed, and discuss clinical implications.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature available in the PubMed database was carried out, and 17 randomized sham-controlled studies investigating the effectiveness of NIBS techniques on aggression were included. Exclusion criteria included reviews, meta-analyses, and articles not referring to the subject of interest or not addressing cognitive and emotional modulation aims.

CONCLUSIONS

The reviewed data provide promising evidence for the beneficial effects of tDCS, conventional rTMS, and cTBS on aggression in healthy adults, forensic, and clinical samples. The specific stimulation target is a key factor for the success of stimulation on aggression modulation. rTMS and cTBS showed opposite effects on aggression compared with tDCS. However, due to the heterogeneity of stimulation protocols, experimental designs, and samples, we cannot exclude other factors that may play a confounding role.

Attention neuroenhancement through tDCS or neurofeedback: a randomized, single-blind, controlled trial

Neurofeedback and transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) are promising techniques for neuroenhancement of attentional performance. As far as we know no study compared both techniques on attentional performance in healthy participants. We compared tDCS and neurofeedback in a randomized, single-blind, controlled experiment assessing both behavioral (accuracy and time reaction) and electrophysiological (N1, P1, and P3 components) data of participants responding to the Attention Network Task (ANT). Eighty volunteers volunteered for this study. We adopted standard protocols for both techniques, i.e., a Sensorimotor Rhythm (SMR) protocol for neurofeedback and the right DLPFC anodal stimulation for tDCS, applied over nine sessions (two weeks). We did not find significant differences between treatment groups on ANT, neither at the behavioral nor at the electrophysiological levels. However, we found that participants from both neuromodulation groups, irrespective of if active or sham, reported attentional improvements in response to the treatment on a subjective scale. Our study adds another null result to the neuromodulation literature, showing that neurofeedback and tDCS effects are more complex than previously suggested and associated with placebo effect. More studies in neuroenhancement literature are necessary to fully comprehend neuromodulation mechanisms.

Electric Field Strength From Prefrontal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Determines Degree of Working Memory Response: A Potential Application of Reverse-Calculation Modeling?

BACKGROUND

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for working memory is an enticing treatment, but there is mixed evidence to date.

OBJECTIVES

We tested the effects of electric field strength from uniform 2 mA dosing on working memory change from prestimulation to poststimulation. Second, we statistically evaluated a reverse-calculation method of individualizing tDCS dose and its effect on normalizing electric field at the cortex.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed electric field modeling on a data set of 28 healthy older adults (15 women, mean age = 73.7, SD = 7.3) who received ten sessions of active 2 mA tDCS (N = 14) or sham tDCS (N = 14) applied over bilateral dorsolateral prefrontal cortices (DLPFC) in a triple-blind design. We evaluated the relationship between electric field strength and working memory change on an N-back task in conditions of above-median, high electric field from active 2 mA (N = 7), below-median, low electric field from active 2 mA (N = 7), and sham (N = 14) at regions of interest (ROI) at the left and right DLPFC. We then determined the individualized reverse-calculation dose to produce the group average electric field and measured the electric field variance between uniform 2 mA doses vs individualized reverse-calculation doses at the same ROIs.

RESULTS

Working memory improvements from pre- to post-tDCS were significant for the above-median electric field from active 2 mA condition at the left DLPFC (mixed ANOVA, p = 0.013). Furthermore, reverse-calculation modeling significantly reduced electric field variance at both ROIs (Levene's test; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Higher electric fields at the left DLPFC from uniform 2 mA doses appear to drive working memory improvements from tDCS. Individualized doses from reverse-calculation modeling significantly reduce electric field variance at the cortex. Taken together, using reverse-calculation modeling to produce the same, high electric fields at the cortex across participants may produce more effective future tDCS treatments for working memory.

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) over the Intraparietal Sulcus Does Not Influence Working Memory Performance

Mixed results of the impact of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on working memory have been reported. Contrarily to previous studies who focused mainly on stimulating the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, we modulated the left intraparietal sulcus (IPS) area which is considered to support attentional control aspects of working memory. Using a within-participant experimental design, participants completed three different conditions: anodal stimulation of the IPS, cathodal stimulation of the IPS, and sham stimulation of the IPS. Both visual and verbal working memory tasks were administered. In the visual task, participants had to memorize a random set of colored figures. In the verbal task, participants had to memorize a string of letters. Working memory load was manipulated in both tasks (six figures/letters vs. two figures/letters). No significant differences in accuracy or reaction time between the anodal, cathodal and sham conditions were found. Bayesian analysis supported evidence for an absence of effect. The results of the present study add to the growing body of contradictory evidence regarding the modulatory effects of single session tDCS on working memory performance.

Modality effects in verbal working memory updating: Transcranial direct current stimulation over human inferior frontal gyrus and posterior parietal cortex

Verbal working memory (VWM) involves visual and auditory verbal information. Neuroimaging studies have shown significant modality effects for VWM in the left posterior parietal cortex (PPC). The left inferior frontal gyrus (IFG) is more sensitive to auditory and phonological information. However, much less is known about the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the left PPC and IFG on different sensory modalities of VWM (auditory vs. visual). Therefore, the present study aimed to examine whether tDCS over the left PPC and IFG affects visual and auditory VWM updating performance using a single-blind design. Fifty-one healthy participants were randomly assigned to three tDCS groups (left PPC/left IFG/sham) and were asked to complete both the visual and auditory letter 3-back tasks. Results showed that stimulating the left PPC enhanced the response efficiency of visual, but not auditory, VWM compared with the sham condition. Anodal stimulation to the left IFG improved the response efficiency of both tasks. The present study revealed a modality effect of VWM in the left PPC, while the left IFG had a causal role in VWM updating of different sensory modalities.