Stephen L Schmidt1, Apoorva K Iyengar2, A Alban Foulser3, Michael R Boyle1, Flavio Fröhlich4. 1. Department of Psychiatry, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA; Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA. 2. Department of Biology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA. 3. Department of Psychology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA. 4. Department of Psychiatry, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA; Neurobiology Curriculum, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA; Department of Cell Biology and Physiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA; Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA; Neuroscience Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA. Electronic address: flavio_frohlich@med.unc.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation modality that may modulate cognition by enhancing endogenous neocortical oscillations by application of sine-wave electric fields. Yet, the role of endogenous network activity in enabling and shaping the effects of tACS has remained unclear. OBJECTIVE: We combined optogenetic stimulation and multichannel slice electrophysiology to elucidate how the effect of a weak sine-wave electric field depends on the ongoing cortical oscillatory activity. We hypothesized that endogenous cortical oscillations constrain neuromodulation by tACS. METHODS: We studied the effect of weak sine-wave electric fields on oscillatory activity in mouse neocortical slices. Optogenetic control of the network activity enabled the generation of in vivo-like cortical oscillations for studying the temporal relationship between network activity and sine-wave electric field stimulation. RESULTS: Weak electric fields enhanced endogenous oscillations but failed to induce a frequency shift of the ongoing oscillation for stimulation frequencies that were not matched to the endogenous oscillation. This constraint on the effect of electric field stimulation imposed by endogenous network dynamics was limited to the case of weak electric fields targeting in vivo-like network dynamics. Together, these results suggest that the key mechanism of tACS may be enhancing, but not overriding, intrinsic network dynamics. CONCLUSION: Our results contribute to understanding the inconsistent tACS results from human studies and propose that stimulation precisely adjusted in frequency to the endogenous oscillations is key to rational design of non-invasive brain stimulation paradigms.
BACKGROUND: Transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation modality that may modulate cognition by enhancing endogenous neocortical oscillations by application of sine-wave electric fields. Yet, the role of endogenous network activity in enabling and shaping the effects of tACS has remained unclear. OBJECTIVE: We combined optogenetic stimulation and multichannel slice electrophysiology to elucidate how the effect of a weak sine-wave electric field depends on the ongoing cortical oscillatory activity. We hypothesized that endogenous cortical oscillations constrain neuromodulation by tACS. METHODS: We studied the effect of weak sine-wave electric fields on oscillatory activity in mouse neocortical slices. Optogenetic control of the network activity enabled the generation of in vivo-like cortical oscillations for studying the temporal relationship between network activity and sine-wave electric field stimulation. RESULTS: Weak electric fields enhanced endogenous oscillations but failed to induce a frequency shift of the ongoing oscillation for stimulation frequencies that were not matched to the endogenous oscillation. This constraint on the effect of electric field stimulation imposed by endogenous network dynamics was limited to the case of weak electric fields targeting in vivo-like network dynamics. Together, these results suggest that the key mechanism of tACS may be enhancing, but not overriding, intrinsic network dynamics. CONCLUSION: Our results contribute to understanding the inconsistent tACS results from human studies and propose that stimulation precisely adjusted in frequency to the endogenous oscillations is key to rational design of non-invasive brain stimulation paradigms.
Authors: Paul Sauseng; Wolfgang Klimesch; Kirstin F Heise; Walter R Gruber; Elisa Holz; Ahmed A Karim; Mark Glennon; Christian Gerloff; Niels Birbaumer; Friedhelm C Hummel Journal: Curr Biol Date: 2009-11-17 Impact factor: 10.834
Authors: Jessica A Cardin; Marie Carlén; Konstantinos Meletis; Ulf Knoblich; Feng Zhang; Karl Deisseroth; Li-Huei Tsai; Christopher I Moore Journal: Nature Date: 2009-04-26 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Juliann M Mellin; Sankaraleengam Alagapan; Caroline Lustenberger; Courtney E Lugo; Morgan L Alexander; John H Gilmore; L Fredrik Jarskog; Flavio Fröhlich Journal: Eur Psychiatry Date: 2018-03-11 Impact factor: 5.361
Authors: Loek Brinkman; Arjen Stolk; Tom R Marshall; Sophie Esterer; Poppy Sharp; H Chris Dijkerman; Floris P de Lange; Ivan Toni Journal: J Neurosci Date: 2016-08-17 Impact factor: 6.167
Authors: Hamed Ekhtiari; Hosna Tavakoli; Giovanni Addolorato; Chris Baeken; Antonello Bonci; Salvatore Campanella; Luis Castelo-Branco; Gaëlle Challet-Bouju; Vincent P Clark; Eric Claus; Pinhas N Dannon; Alessandra Del Felice; Tess den Uyl; Marco Diana; Massimo di Giannantonio; John R Fedota; Paul Fitzgerald; Luigi Gallimberti; Marie Grall-Bronnec; Sarah C Herremans; Martin J Herrmann; Asif Jamil; Eman Khedr; Christos Kouimtsidis; Karolina Kozak; Evgeny Krupitsky; Claus Lamm; William V Lechner; Graziella Madeo; Nastaran Malmir; Giovanni Martinotti; William M McDonald; Chiara Montemitro; Ester M Nakamura-Palacios; Mohammad Nasehi; Xavier Noël; Masoud Nosratabadi; Martin Paulus; Mauro Pettorruso; Basant Pradhan; Samir K Praharaj; Haley Rafferty; Gregory Sahlem; Betty Jo Salmeron; Anne Sauvaget; Renée S Schluter; Carmen Sergiou; Alireza Shahbabaie; Christine Sheffer; Primavera A Spagnolo; Vaughn R Steele; Ti-Fei Yuan; Josanne D M van Dongen; Vincent Van Waes; Ganesan Venkatasubramanian; Antonio Verdejo-García; Ilse Verveer; Justine W Welsh; Michael J Wesley; Katie Witkiewitz; Fatemeh Yavari; Mohammad-Reza Zarrindast; Laurie Zawertailo; Xiaochu Zhang; Yoon-Hee Cha; Tony P George; Flavio Frohlich; Anna E Goudriaan; Shirley Fecteau; Stacey B Daughters; Elliot A Stein; Felipe Fregni; Michael A Nitsche; Abraham Zangen; Marom Bikson; Colleen A Hanlon Journal: Neurosci Biobehav Rev Date: 2019-07-02 Impact factor: 8.989
Authors: Caroline Lustenberger; Michael R Boyle; A Alban Foulser; Juliann M Mellin; Flavio Fröhlich Journal: Cortex Date: 2015-04-01 Impact factor: 4.027
Authors: Timothy Y Mariano; Frederick W Burgess; Marguerite Bowker; Jason Kirschner; Mascha Van't Wout-Frank; Richard N Jones; Christopher W Halladay; Michael Stein; Benjamin D Greenberg Journal: Pain Med Date: 2019-06-01 Impact factor: 3.750