Effectiveness of Unihemispheric Concurrent Dual-Site Stimulation over M1 and Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex Stimulation on Pain Processing: A Triple Blind Cross-Over Control Trial

TDCS for parkinson's disease disease-related pain: A randomized trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on Parkinson's disease (PD)-related pain.

METHODS

This triple-blind randomized controlled trial included twenty-two patients (age range 38-85, 10 male) with PD-related pain. Eleven subjects received ten sessions of 20 minutes tDCS over the primary motor cortex contralateral to pain at 2 mA intensity. Eleven subjects received sham stimulation. Outcome measures included changes in the Kinǵs Parkinsońs Pain Scale (KPPS), Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), widespread mechanical hyperalgesia (WMH), temporal summation of pain (TS), and conditioned pain modulation (CPM).

RESULTS

Significant differences were found in KPPS between groups favoring the active-tDCS group compared to the sham-tDCS group at 15-days follow-up (p = 0.014) but not at 2 days post-intervention (p = 0.059). The active-group showed significant improvements over the sham-group after 15 days (p = 0.017). Significant changes were found in CPM between groups in favor of active-tDCS group at 2 days post-intervention (p = 0.002) and at 15 days (p = 0.017). No meaningful differences were observed in BPI or TS.

CONCLUSIONS

tDCS of the primary motor cortex alleviates perceived PD-related pain, reduces pain sensitization, and enhances descending pain inhibition.

SIGNIFICANCE

This is the first study to test and demonstrate the use of tDCS for improving PD-related pain.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Concomitant dual-site tDCS and dark chocolate improve cognitive and endurance performance following cognitive effort under hypoxia: a randomized controlled trial

Ten male cyclists were randomized into four experimental conditions in this randomized, cross-over, double-blind, and sham-controlled study to test the combined effect of acute dark chocolate (DC) ingestion and anodal concurrent dual-site transcranial direct current stimulation (a-tDCS) targeting M1 and left DLPFC on cognitive and whole-body endurance performance in hypoxia after performing a cognitive task. Two hours before the sessions, chocolate was consumed. After arriving at the lab, participants completed an incongruent Stroop task for 30 min in hypoxia (O2 = 13%) to induce mental fatigue, followed by 20 min of tDCS (2 mA) in hypoxia. Then, in hypoxia, they performed a time-to-exhaustion task (TTE) while measuring physiological and psychophysiological responses. Cognitive performance was measured at baseline, after the Stroop task, and during and after TTE. TTE in 'DC + a-tDCS' was significantly longer than in 'white chocolate (WC) + a-tDCS' and WC + sham-tDCS'. The vastus medialis muscle electromyography amplitude was significantly higher in 'DC + a-tDCS' and 'DC + sham-tDCS' than in 'WC + sh-tDCS'. During and after the TTE, choice reaction time was significantly lower in 'DC + a-tDCS' compared to 'WC + sh-tDCS'. Other physiological or psychophysiological variables showed no significant differences. The concurrent use of acute DC consumption and dual-site a-tDCS might improve cognitive and endurance performance in hypoxia.

Modulation of central pain mechanisms using high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation: A double-blind, sham-controlled study

BACKGROUND

The use of high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS) has shown analgesic effects in some chronic pain patients, but limited anti-nociceptive effects in healthy asymptomatic subjects.

METHODS

This double-blinded sham-controlled study assessed the effects of HD-tDCS applied on three consecutive days on central pain mechanisms in healthy participants with (N = 40) and without (N = 40) prolonged experimental pain induced by intramuscular injection of nerve growth factor into the right hand on Day 1. Participants were randomly assigned to Sham-tDCS (N = 20 with pain, N = 20 without) or Active-tDCS (N = 20 with pain, N = 20 without) targeting simultaneously the primary motor cortex and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex for 20 min with 2 mA stimulation intensity. Central pain mechanisms were assessed by cuff algometry on the legs measuring pressure pain sensitivity, temporal summation of pain (TSP) and conditioned pain modulation (CPM), at baseline and after HD-tDCS on Day 2 and Day 3. Based on subject's assessment of received HD-tDCS (sham or active), they were effectively blinded.

RESULTS

Compared with Sham-tDCS, Active-tDCS did not significantly reduce the average NGF-induced pain intensity. Tonic pain-induced temporal summation at Day 2 and Day 3 was significantly lower in the NGF-pain group under Active-tDCS compared to the pain group with Sham-tDCS (p ≤ 0.05). No significant differences were found in the cuff pressure pain detection/tolerance thresholds or CPM effect across the 3 days of HD-tDCS in any of the four groups.

CONCLUSION

HD-tDCS reduced the facilitation of TSP caused by tonic pain suggesting that efficacy of HD-tDCS might depend on the presence of sensitized central pain mechanisms.

Single Session Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Different Cortical Areas

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

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

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