scholarly journals Preconditioning cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation facilitates the neuroplastic effect of subsequent anodal transcranial direct current stimulation applied during cycling in young adults

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maryam Pourmajidian ◽  
Benedikt Lauber ◽  
Simranjit K Sidhu
Keyword(s):  
Direct Current ◽  
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation ◽  
Motor Evoked Potentials ◽  
Corticospinal Excitability ◽  
Anodal Tdcs ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Cycling Exercise ◽  
Direct Current Stimulation ◽  
Post Test ◽  
Double Blind Design

AbstractThe study aimed to examine the effect of a priming cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation (ctDCS) before subsequent anodal-tDCS (atDCS) was applied during low workload cycling exercise on the corticospinal responses in young healthy individuals. Eleven young subjects participated in two sessions receiving either priming ctDCS or sham stimulation, followed by atDCS while cycling (i.e. ctDCS-atDCS, sham-atDCS) at 1.2 times their body weight (84 ± 20 W) in a counterbalanced double-blind design. Corticospinal excitability was measured with motor evoked potentials (MEPs) elicited via transcranial magnetic stimulation with the intensity set to produce an MEP amplitude of 1 mV in a resting hand muscle at baseline (PRE), following priming tDCS (POST-PRIMING) and post atDCS combined with cycling exercise (POST-TEST). There was a significant interaction between time and intervention (P < 0.01) on MEPs. MEPs increased from PRE (1.0 ± 0.06 mV) to POST-TEST (1.3 ± 0.06 mV) during ctDCS-atDCS (P < 0.001) but did not change across time during sham-atDCS (1.0 ± 0.06 mV, P > 0.7). Furthermore, MEPs were higher in ctDCS-atDCS compared to sham-atDCS (P < 0.01) at both POST-PRIMING (ctDCS-atDCS: 1.1 ± 0.06, sham-atDCS: 1.0 ± 0.06) and POST-TEST (ctDCS-atDCS: 1.3 ± 0.06, sham-atDCS: 1.0 ± 0.06). These outcomes demonstrate that cathodal tDCS priming can enhance corticospinal excitability following anodal tDCS applied in combination with cycling exercise. The findings have implications for the application of tDCS in combination with cycling exercise in rehabilitation and sporting contexts.

Acute Changes in Motor Cortical Excitability During Slow Oscillatory and Constant Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation

2009 ◽  
Vol 102 (4) ◽  
pp. 2303-2311 ◽  
Author(s):  
Til Ole Bergmann ◽  
Sergiu Groppa ◽  
Markus Seeger ◽  
Matthias Mölle ◽  
Lisa Marshall ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Direct Current ◽  
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation ◽  
Cortical Excitability ◽  
Motor Evoked Potentials ◽  
Corticospinal Excitability ◽  
Slow Oscillation ◽  
Facilitatory Effect ◽  
Endogenous Rhythms ◽  
Direct Current Stimulation ◽  
On Line

Transcranial oscillatory current stimulation has recently emerged as a noninvasive technique that can interact with ongoing endogenous rhythms of the human brain. Yet, there is still little knowledge on how time-varied exogenous currents acutely modulate cortical excitability. In ten healthy individuals we used on-line single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to search for systematic shifts in corticospinal excitability during anodal sleeplike 0.8-Hz slow oscillatory transcranial direct current stimulation (so-tDCS). In separate sessions, we repeatedly applied 30-s trials (two blocks at 20 min) of either anodal so-tDCS or constant tDCS (c-tDCS) to the primary motor hand area during quiet wakefulness. Simultaneously and time-locked to different phase angles of the slow oscillation, motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) as an index of corticospinal excitability were obtained in the contralateral hand muscles 10, 20, and 30 s after the onset of tDCS. MEPs were also measured off-line before, between, and after both stimulation blocks to detect any lasting excitability shifts. Both tDCS modes increased MEP amplitudes during stimulation with an attenuation of the facilitatory effect toward the end of a 30-s tDCS trial. No phase-locking of corticospinal excitability to the exogenous oscillation was observed during so-tDCS. Off-line TMS revealed that both c-tDCS and so-tDCS resulted in a lasting excitability increase. The individual magnitude of MEP facilitation during the first tDCS trials predicted the lasting MEP facilitation found after tDCS. We conclude that sleep slow oscillation-like excitability changes cannot be actively imposed on the awake cortex with so-tDCS, but phase-independent on-line as well as off-line facilitation can reliably be induced.

scholarly journals Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation over the Vertex Enhances Leg Motor Cortex Excitability Bilaterally

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 98 ◽  
Author(s):  
Soumya Ghosh ◽  
David Hathorn ◽  
Jennifer Eisenhauer ◽  
Jesse Dixon ◽  
Ian D. Cooper
Keyword(s):  
Motor Cortex ◽  
Direct Current ◽  
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation ◽  
Neurological Disorders ◽  
Tibialis Anterior ◽  
Motor Evoked Potentials ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Direct Current Stimulation ◽  
Motor Cortex Excitability

In many studies, anodal transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) is applied near the vertex to simultaneously facilitate leg motor cortex (M1) of both hemispheres and enhance recovery of gait and balance in neurological disorders. However, its effect on the excitability of leg M1 in either hemisphere is not well known. In this double-blind sham-controlled study, corticospinal excitability changes induced in leg M1 of both hemispheres by anodal (2 mA for 20 minutes) or sham tDCS (for 20 min) over the vertex were evaluated. Peak amplitudes of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) induced motor evoked potentials (MEPs) were measured over the contralateral Tibialis Anterior (TA) muscle before and up to 40 min after tDCS in 11 normal participants. Analysis of data from all participants found significant overall increase in the excitability of leg M1 after tDCS. However, in individual subjects there was variability in observed effects. In 4 participants, 20 min of tDCS increased mean MEPs of TAs on both sides; in 4 participants there was increased mean MEP only on one side and in 3 subjects there was no change. It’s not known if the benefits of tDCS in improving gait and balance are dependent on excitability changes induced in one or both leg M1; such information may be useful to predict treatment outcomes.

scholarly journals Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation increases corticospinal excitability, while performance is unchanged

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (7) ◽  
pp. e0254888
Author(s):  
Mathias Kristiansen ◽  
Mikkel Jacobi Thomsen ◽  
Jens Nørgaard ◽  
Jon Aaes ◽  
Dennis Knudsen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Direct Current ◽  
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation ◽  
Perceived Exertion ◽  
Motor Evoked Potentials ◽  
Time Trial ◽  
Corticospinal Excitability ◽  
Afferent Feedback ◽  
Sham Stimulation ◽  
Direct Current Stimulation ◽  
Rpe Clamp

Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (a-tDCS) has been shown to improve bicycle time to fatigue (TTF) tasks at 70–80% of VO2max and downregulate rate of perceived exertion (RPE). This study aimed to investigate the effect of a-tDCS on a RPE-clamp test, a 250-kJ time trial (TT) and motor evoked potentials (MEP). Twenty participants volunteered for three trials; control, sham stimulation and a-tDCS. Transcranial magnetic stimulation was used to determine the corticospinal excitability for 12 participants pre and post sham stimulation and a-tDCS. The a-tDCS protocol consisted of 13 minutes of stimulation (2 mA) with the anode placed above the Cz. The RPE-clamp test consisted of 5 minutes ergometer bicycling at an RPE of 13 on the Borg scale, and the TT consisted of a 250 kJ (∼10 km) long bicycle ergometer test. During each test, power output, heart rate and oxygen consumption was measured, while RPE was evaluated. MEPs increased significantly by 36% (±36%) post a-tDCS, with 8.8% (±31%) post sham stimulation (p = 0.037). No significant changes were found for any parameter at the RPE-clamp or TT. The lack of improvement may be due to RPE being more controlled by afferent feedback during TT tests than during TTF tests. Based on the results of the present study, it is concluded that a-tDCS applied over Cz, does not enhance self-paced cycling performance.

scholarly journals Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) combined with cognitive training in adolescent boys with ADHD: a double-blind, randomised, sham-controlled trial

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel J. Westwood ◽  
Marion Criaud ◽  
Sheut-Ling Lam ◽  
Steve Lukito ◽  
Sophie Wallace-Hanlon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Cognitive Training ◽  
Direct Current ◽  
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Cognitive Effects ◽  
Adhd Symptoms ◽  
Anodal Tdcs ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Direct Current Stimulation

ABSTRACTBackgroundTranscranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) could be a side-effect free alternative to psychostimulants in Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Although there is limited evidence for clinical and cognitive effects, most studies were small, single-session, and stimulated left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC). No sham-controlled study has stimulated right inferior frontal cortex (rIFC), which is the most consistently under-functioning region in ADHD, with multiple sessions of anodal tDCS combined with cognitive training (CT) to enhance effects.Objective/HypothesisTo investigate clinical and cognitive effects of multi-session anodal tDCS over rIFC combined with CT in a double-blind, randomised, sham-controlled trial (RCT).Methods50 boys with ADHD (10-18 years) received 15 weekday sessions of anodal or sham tDCS over rIFC combined with CT (20mins, 1mA). ANCOVA, adjusting for baseline measures, age, and medication status, tested group differences in clinical and ADHD-relevant executive functions at posttreatment and after 6-months.ResultsADHD-Rating Scale, Conners ADHD Index, and adverse effects were significantly lower at post-treatment after sham relative to real tDCS. No other effects were significant.ConclusionsThis rigorous multi-session RCT of tDCS over the rIFC in ADHD combined with CT, showed no evidence of improvement of ADHD symptoms or cognitive performance. Findings extend limited meta-analytic evidence of cognitive and clinical effects in ADHD after 1-5 tDCS sessions over mainly left dlPFC. Given that tDCS is commercially and clinically available, the findings are important as they suggest that rIFC stimulation may not be indicated as a neurotherapy for cognitive or clinical remediation for ADHDHighlightstDCS has been suggested as an alternative treatment for ADHDWe combined 15-session anodal tDCS over the rIFC with cognitive training in ADHD childrenReal versus sham tDCS showed no cognitive or symptom improvementsConversely, real tDCS showed lower ADHD symptoms and higher adverse effectsMulti-session tDCS of rIFC shows no clinical or cognitive benefits in ADHD

scholarly journals Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) combined with cognitive training in adolescent boys with ADHD: a double-blind, randomised, sham-controlled trial

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Samuel J. Westwood ◽  
Marion Criaud ◽  
Sheut-Ling Lam ◽  
Steve Lukito ◽  
Sophie Wallace-Hanlon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Training ◽  
Direct Current ◽  
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Cognitive Effects ◽  
Anodal Tdcs ◽  
Adolescent Boys ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Direct Current Stimulation

Abstract Background Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) could be a side-effect-free alternative to psychostimulants in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Although there is limited evidence for clinical and cognitive effects, most studies were small, single-session and stimulated left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC). No sham-controlled study has stimulated the right inferior frontal cortex (rIFC), which is the most consistently under-functioning region in ADHD, with multiple anodal-tDCS sessions combined with cognitive training (CT) to enhance effects. Thus, we investigated the clinical and cognitive effects of multi-session anodal-tDCS over rIFC combined with CT in double-blind, randomised, sham-controlled trial (RCT, ISRCTN48265228). Methods Fifty boys with ADHD (10–18 years) received 15 weekday sessions of anodal- or sham-tDCS over rIFC combined with CT (20 min, 1 mA). ANCOVA, adjusting for baseline measures, age and medication status, tested group differences in clinical and ADHD-relevant executive functions at posttreatment and after 6 months. Results ADHD-Rating Scale, Conners ADHD Index and adverse effects were significantly lower at post-treatment after sham relative to anodal tDCS. No other effects were significant. Conclusions This rigorous and largest RCT of tDCS in adolescent boys with ADHD found no evidence of improved ADHD symptoms or cognitive performance following multi-session anodal tDCS over rIFC combined with CT. These findings extend limited meta-analytic evidence of cognitive and clinical effects in ADHD after 1–5 tDCS sessions over mainly left dlPFC. Given that tDCS is commercially and clinically available, the findings are important as they suggest that rIFC stimulation may not be indicated as a neurotherapy for cognitive or clinical remediation for ADHD.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document