Literature DB >> 23943521

Non-invasive cerebellar stimulation--a consensus paper.

G Grimaldi1, G P Argyropoulos, A Boehringer, P Celnik, M J Edwards, R Ferrucci, J M Galea, S J Groiss, K Hiraoka, P Kassavetis, E Lesage, M Manto, R C Miall, A Priori, A Sadnicka, Y Ugawa, U Ziemann.   

Abstract

The field of neurostimulation of the cerebellum either with transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS; single pulse or repetitive (rTMS)) or transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS; anodal or cathodal) is gaining popularity in the scientific community, in particular because these stimulation techniques are non-invasive and provide novel information on cerebellar functions. There is a consensus amongst the panel of experts that both TMS and tDCS can effectively influence cerebellar functions, not only in the motor domain, with effects on visually guided tracking tasks, motor surround inhibition, motor adaptation and learning, but also for the cognitive and affective operations handled by the cerebro-cerebellar circuits. Verbal working memory, semantic associations and predictive language processing are amongst these operations. Both TMS and tDCS modulate the connectivity between the cerebellum and the primary motor cortex, tuning cerebellar excitability. Cerebellar TMS is an effective and valuable method to evaluate the cerebello-thalamo-cortical loop functions and for the study of the pathophysiology of ataxia. In most circumstances, DCS induces a polarity-dependent site-specific modulation of cerebellar activity. Paired associative stimulation of the cerebello-dentato-thalamo-M1 pathway can induce bidirectional long-term spike-timing-dependent plasticity-like changes of corticospinal excitability. However, the panel of experts considers that several important issues still remain unresolved and require further research. In particular, the role of TMS in promoting cerebellar plasticity is not established. Moreover, the exact positioning of electrode stimulation and the duration of the after effects of tDCS remain unclear. Future studies are required to better define how DCS over particular regions of the cerebellum affects individual cerebellar symptoms, given the topographical organization of cerebellar symptoms. The long-term neural consequences of non-invasive cerebellar modulation are also unclear. Although there is an agreement that the clinical applications in cerebellar disorders are likely numerous, it is emphasized that rigorous large-scale clinical trials are missing. Further studies should be encouraged to better clarify the role of using non-invasive neurostimulation techniques over the cerebellum in motor, cognitive and psychiatric rehabilitation strategies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 23943521     DOI: 10.1007/s12311-013-0514-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cerebellum        ISSN: 1473-4222            Impact factor:   3.847


  129 in total

1.  Cerebellar morphology in developmental dyslexia.

Authors:  Caroline Rae; Jenny A Harasty; Theresa E Dzendrowskyj; Joel B Talcott; Judy M Simpson; Andrew M Blamire; Ruth M Dixon; Martin A Lee; Campbell H Thompson; Peter Styles; Alex J Richardson; John F Stein
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 3.139

2.  Preserved verb generation in patients with cerebellar atrophy.

Authors:  S Richter; O Kaiser; C Hein-Kropp; A Dimitrova; E Gizewski; A Beck; V Aurich; W Ziegler; D Timmann
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 3.139

3.  Cerebellar TMS evokes a long latency motor response in the hand during a visually guided manual tracking task.

Authors:  Koichi Hiraoka; Kenichi Horino; Atsuko Yagura; Akiyoshi Matsugi
Journal:  Cerebellum       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 3.847

4.  Cerebellar contributions to locomotor adaptations during splitbelt treadmill walking.

Authors:  Susanne M Morton; Amy J Bastian
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2006-09-06       Impact factor: 6.167

5.  Purkinje cell activity during motor learning.

Authors:  P F Gilbert; W T Thach
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  1977-06-10       Impact factor: 3.252

6.  Performance of motor imagery brain-computer interface based on anodal transcranial direct current stimulation modulation.

Authors:  Pengfei Wei; Wei He; Yi Zhou; Liping Wang
Journal:  IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng       Date:  2013-03-07       Impact factor: 3.802

7.  Human locomotor adaptive learning is proportional to depression of cerebellar excitability.

Authors:  Gowri Jayaram; Joseph M Galea; Amy J Bastian; Pablo Celnik
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2011-01-14       Impact factor: 5.357

8.  Cerebellar transcranial magnetic stimulation impairs verbal working memory.

Authors:  John E Desmond; S H Annabel Chen; Perry B Shieh
Journal:  Ann Neurol       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 10.422

9.  Reduced intracortical facilitation in patients with cerebellar degeneration.

Authors:  J Liepert; K Wessel; P Schwenkreis; P Trillenberg; V Otto; M Vorgerd; J P Malin; M Tegenthoff
Journal:  Acta Neurol Scand       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 3.209

10.  Cerebellar rTMS disrupts predictive language processing.

Authors:  Elise Lesage; Blaire E Morgan; Andrew C Olson; Antje S Meyer; R Chris Miall
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2012-09-25       Impact factor: 10.834

View more
  102 in total

1.  Anodal Direct Current Stimulation of the Cerebellum Reduces Cerebellar Brain Inhibition but Does Not Influence Afferent Input from the Hand or Face in Healthy Adults.

Authors:  Sebastian H Doeltgen; Jessica Young; Lynley V Bradnam
Journal:  Cerebellum       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 3.847

2.  High-frequency focal repetitive cerebellar stimulation induces prolonged increases in human pharyngeal motor cortex excitability.

Authors:  Dipesh H Vasant; Emilia Michou; Satish Mistry; John C Rothwell; Shaheen Hamdy
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2015-09-30       Impact factor: 5.182

3.  The Impact of Stimulation Intensity and Coil Type on Reliability and Tolerability of Cerebellar Brain Inhibition (CBI) via Dual-Coil TMS.

Authors:  Lara Fernandez; Brendan P Major; Wei-Peng Teo; Linda K Byrne; Peter G Enticott
Journal:  Cerebellum       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 3.847

4.  Cerebellar contributions to verbal working memory.

Authors:  Simon P Tomlinson; Nick J Davis; Helen M Morgan; R Martyn Bracewell
Journal:  Cerebellum       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 3.847

5.  Consensus Paper: Cerebellum and Social Cognition.

Authors:  Frank Van Overwalle; Mario Manto; Zaira Cattaneo; Silvia Clausi; Chiara Ferrari; John D E Gabrieli; Xavier Guell; Elien Heleven; Michela Lupo; Qianying Ma; Marco Michelutti; Giusy Olivito; Min Pu; Laura C Rice; Jeremy D Schmahmann; Libera Siciliano; Arseny A Sokolov; Catherine J Stoodley; Kim van Dun; Larry Vandervert; Maria Leggio
Journal:  Cerebellum       Date:  2020-12       Impact factor: 3.847

Review 6.  Targeting the Cerebellum by Noninvasive Neurostimulation: a Review.

Authors:  Kim van Dun; Florian Bodranghien; Mario Manto; Peter Mariën
Journal:  Cerebellum       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 3.847

7.  Magnetic stimulation of the cerebellum. Moving towards the clinic.

Authors:  Giacomo Koch; Egidio D'Angelo
Journal:  Funct Neurol       Date:  2014 Jan-Mar

8.  Consensus Paper: Cerebellum and Emotion.

Authors:  M Adamaszek; F D'Agata; R Ferrucci; C Habas; S Keulen; K C Kirkby; M Leggio; P Mariën; M Molinari; E Moulton; L Orsi; F Van Overwalle; C Papadelis; A Priori; B Sacchetti; D J Schutter; C Styliadis; J Verhoeven
Journal:  Cerebellum       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 3.847

9.  Cathodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) to the Right Cerebellar Hemisphere Affects Motor Adaptation During Gait.

Authors:  Lara Fernandez; Natalia Albein-Urios; Melissa Kirkovski; Jennifer L McGinley; Anna T Murphy; Christian Hyde; Mark A Stokes; Nicole J Rinehart; Peter G Enticott
Journal:  Cerebellum       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 3.847

10.  Neck muscle fatigue impacts plasticity and sensorimotor integration in cerebellum and motor cortex in response to novel motor skill acquisition.

Authors:  Mahboobeh Zabihhosseinian; Paul Yielder; Victoria Berkers; Ushani Ambalavanar; Michael Holmes; Bernadette Murphy
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2020-08-05       Impact factor: 2.714

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.