Literature DB >> 22875900

Transcorneal alternating current stimulation induces EEG "aftereffects" only in rats with an intact visual system but not after severe optic nerve damage.

Elena G Sergeeva1, Anton B Fedorov, Petra Henrich-Noack, Bernhard A Sabel.   

Abstract

Noninvasive alternating current stimulation can induce vision restoration in patients with chronic optic nerve damage and results in electroencephalogram (EEG) aftereffects. To better understand the mechanisms of action, we studied such EEG "aftereffects" of transcorneal alternating current stimulation (tACS) at the chronic posttraumatic state in rats. EEG baseline was recorded from visual cortex under ketamine/xylazine narcosis of healthy rats and rats with chronic severe optic nerve crush. One week later, both groups were again anesthetized and stimulated transcorneally twice for 12 min each time. tACS-induced changes were compared with baseline EEG. Over the course of 65 min narcosis baseline EEG revealed a shift from a dominant delta power to theta. This shift was significantly delayed in lesioned animals compared with healthy controls. tACS applied during the late narcosis stage in normal rats led to significantly increased theta power with a parallel shift of the dominating peak to higher frequency which outlasted the stimulation period by 15 min (aftereffects). EEG in lesioned rats was not significantly changed. In rodents, tACS can induce neuroplasticity as shown by EEG aftereffects that outlast the stimulation period. But this requires a minimal level of brain activation because aftereffects are not seen when tACS is applied during deep anesthesia and not when applied to animals after severe optic nerve damage. We conclude that tACS is only effective to induce cortical plasticity when the the retina can be excited.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22875900     DOI: 10.1152/jn.00341.2012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurophysiol        ISSN: 0022-3077            Impact factor:   2.714


  10 in total

1.  Whole-eye electrical stimulation therapy preserves visual function and structure in P23H-1 rats.

Authors:  Adam M Hanif; Moon K Kim; Joel G Thomas; Vincent T Ciavatta; Micah Chrenek; John R Hetling; Machelle T Pardue
Journal:  Exp Eye Res       Date:  2016-06-18       Impact factor: 3.467

Review 2.  Electrical Stimulation as a Means for Improving Vision.

Authors:  Amer Sehic; Shuai Guo; Kin-Sang Cho; Rima M Corraya; Dong F Chen; Tor P Utheim
Journal:  Am J Pathol       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 4.307

Review 3.  The transcorneal electrical stimulation as a novel therapeutic strategy against retinal and optic neuropathy: a review of experimental and clinical trials.

Authors:  Ye Tao; Tao Chen; Bei Liu; Li-Qiang Wang; Guang-Hua Peng; Li-Min Qin; Zhong-Jun Yan; Yi-Fei Huang
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-06-18       Impact factor: 1.779

4.  Proteomic study of retinal proteins associated with transcorneal electric stimulation in rats.

Authors:  Takashi Kanamoto; Nazariy Souchelnytskyi; Takuji Kurimoto; Yasuhiro Ikeda; Hiroaki Sakaue; Yasunari Munemasa; Yoshiaki Kiuchi
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-03-04       Impact factor: 1.909

5.  Low intensity repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation does not induce cell survival or regeneration in a mouse optic nerve crush model.

Authors:  Alexander D Tang; Kalina Makowiecki; Carole Bartlett; Jennifer Rodger
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-05-20       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Brain-state-dependent non-invasive brain stimulation and functional priming: a hypothesis.

Authors:  Elena G Sergeeva; Petra Henrich-Noack; Michał Bola; Bernhard A Sabel
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2014-11-05       Impact factor: 3.169

7.  Association of Electroencephalography (EEG) Power Spectra with Corneal Nerve Fiber Injury in Retinoblastoma Patients.

Authors:  Jianliang Liu; Juanjuan Sun; Yumei Diao; Aijun Deng
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2016-09-04

Review 8.  Non-invasive electrical brain stimulation: from acute to late-stage treatment of central nervous system damage.

Authors:  Petra Henrich-Noack; Elena G Sergeeva; Bernhard A Sabel
Journal:  Neural Regen Res       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 5.135

9.  Electrical brain stimulation induces dendritic stripping but improves survival of silent neurons after optic nerve damage.

Authors:  Petra Henrich-Noack; Elena G Sergeeva; Torben Eber; Qing You; Nadine Voigt; Jürgen Köhler; Sebastian Wagner; Stefanie Lazik; Christian Mawrin; Guihua Xu; Sayantan Biswas; Bernhard A Sabel; Christopher Kai-Shun Leung
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-04-04       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 10.  Effects of alternating current stimulation on the healthy and diseased brain.

Authors:  Aini Ismafairus Abd Hamid; Carolin Gall; Oliver Speck; Andrea Antal; Bernhard A Sabel
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2015-10-27       Impact factor: 4.677

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.