Lynda M Murray1, Dylan J Edwards2, Giulio Ruffini3, Douglas Labar4, Argyrios Stampas5, Alvaro Pascual-Leone6, Mar Cortes7. 1. Non-invasive Brain Stimulation and Human Motor Control Laboratory, Burke Medical Research Institute, White Plains, NY; Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Department, Rumailah Hospital, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar; School of Exercise and Health Sciences, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, WA, Australia. Electronic address: LMurray@hmc.org.qa. 2. Non-invasive Brain Stimulation and Human Motor Control Laboratory, Burke Medical Research Institute, White Plains, NY; Neurology Department, Weill Cornell Medical College, Cornell University, New York, NY; Centre for Neuromuscular and Neurological Disorders, University of Western Australia, Nedlands, WA, Australia. 3. Starlab Barcelona SL, Barcelona, Spain. 4. Non-invasive Brain Stimulation and Human Motor Control Laboratory, Burke Medical Research Institute, White Plains, NY; Neurology Department, Weill Cornell Medical College, Cornell University, New York, NY. 5. Burke Rehabilitation Hospital, White Plains, NY. 6. Berenson-Allen Center for Noninvasive Brain Stimulation, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. 7. Non-invasive Brain Stimulation and Human Motor Control Laboratory, Burke Medical Research Institute, White Plains, NY; Neurology Department, Weill Cornell Medical College, Cornell University, New York, NY; Department of Neurology, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (a-tDCS) intensity on corticospinal excitability and affected muscle activation in individuals with chronic spinal cord injury (SCI). DESIGN: Single-blind, randomized, sham-controlled, crossover study. SETTING: Medical research institute and rehabilitation hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Volunteers (N = 9) with chronic SCI and motor dysfunction in wrist extensor muscles. INTERVENTIONS: Three single session exposures to 20 minutes of a-tDCS (anode over the extensor carpi radialis [ECR] muscle representation on the left primary motor cortex, cathode over the right supraorbital area) using 1 mA, 2 mA, or sham stimulation, delivered at rest, with at least 1 week between sessions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Corticospinal excitability was assessed with motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) from the ECR muscle using surface electromyography after transcranial magnetic stimulation. Changes in spinal excitability, sensory threshold, and muscle strength were also investigated. RESULTS:Mean MEP amplitude significantly increased by approximately 40% immediately after 2mA a-tDCS (pre: 0.36 ± 0.1 mV; post: 0.47 ± 0.11 mV; P = .001), but not with 1 mA or sham. Maximal voluntary contraction measures remained unaltered across all conditions. Sensory threshold significantly decreased over time after 1mA (P = .002) and 2mA (P = .039) a-tDCS and did not change with sham. F-wave persistence showed a nonsignificant trend for increase (pre: 32% ± 12%; post: 41% ± 10%; follow-up: 46% ± 12%) after 2 mA stimulation. No adverse effects were reported with any of the experimental conditions. CONCLUSIONS: The a-tDCS can transiently raise corticospinal excitability to affected muscles in patients with chronic SCI after 2 mA stimulation. Sensory perception can improve with both 1 and 2 mA stimulation. This study gives support to the safe and effective use of a-tDCS using small electrodes in patients with SCI and highlights the importance of stimulation intensity.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (a-tDCS) intensity on corticospinal excitability and affected muscle activation in individuals with chronic spinal cord injury (SCI). DESIGN: Single-blind, randomized, sham-controlled, crossover study. SETTING: Medical research institute and rehabilitation hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Volunteers (N = 9) with chronic SCI and motor dysfunction in wrist extensor muscles. INTERVENTIONS: Three single session exposures to 20 minutes of a-tDCS (anode over the extensor carpi radialis [ECR] muscle representation on the left primary motor cortex, cathode over the right supraorbital area) using 1 mA, 2 mA, or sham stimulation, delivered at rest, with at least 1 week between sessions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Corticospinal excitability was assessed with motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) from the ECR muscle using surface electromyography after transcranial magnetic stimulation. Changes in spinal excitability, sensory threshold, and muscle strength were also investigated. RESULTS: Mean MEP amplitude significantly increased by approximately 40% immediately after 2mA a-tDCS (pre: 0.36 ± 0.1 mV; post: 0.47 ± 0.11 mV; P = .001), but not with 1 mA or sham. Maximal voluntary contraction measures remained unaltered across all conditions. Sensory threshold significantly decreased over time after 1mA (P = .002) and 2mA (P = .039) a-tDCS and did not change with sham. F-wave persistence showed a nonsignificant trend for increase (pre: 32% ± 12%; post: 41% ± 10%; follow-up: 46% ± 12%) after 2 mA stimulation. No adverse effects were reported with any of the experimental conditions. CONCLUSIONS: The a-tDCS can transiently raise corticospinal excitability to affected muscles in patients with chronic SCI after 2 mA stimulation. Sensory perception can improve with both 1 and 2 mA stimulation. This study gives support to the safe and effective use of a-tDCS using small electrodes in patients with SCI and highlights the importance of stimulation intensity.
Authors: Michael A Nitsche; Antje Seeber; Kai Frommann; Cornelia Carmen Klein; Christian Rochford; Maren S Nitsche; Kristina Fricke; David Liebetanz; Nicolas Lang; Andrea Antal; Walter Paulus; Frithjof Tergau Journal: J Physiol Date: 2005-07-07 Impact factor: 5.182
Authors: Felipe Fregni; Paulo S Boggio; Michael A Nitsche; Marco A Marcolin; Sergio P Rigonatti; Alvaro Pascual-Leone Journal: Bipolar Disord Date: 2006-04 Impact factor: 6.744
Authors: Stephen Burns; Fin Biering-Sørensen; William Donovan; Daniel E Graves; Amitabh Jha; Mark Johansen; Linda Jones; Andrei Krassioukov; Steven Kirshblum; M J Mulcahey; Mary Schmidt Read; William Waring Journal: Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil Date: 2012
Authors: Charlotte J Stagg; Jonathan G Best; Mary C Stephenson; Jacinta O'Shea; Marzena Wylezinska; Z Tamas Kincses; Peter G Morris; Paul M Matthews; Heidi Johansen-Berg Journal: J Neurosci Date: 2009-04-22 Impact factor: 6.167
Authors: A Antal; I Alekseichuk; M Bikson; J Brockmöller; A R Brunoni; R Chen; L G Cohen; G Dowthwaite; J Ellrich; A Flöel; F Fregni; M S George; R Hamilton; J Haueisen; C S Herrmann; F C Hummel; J P Lefaucheur; D Liebetanz; C K Loo; C D McCaig; C Miniussi; P C Miranda; V Moliadze; M A Nitsche; R Nowak; F Padberg; A Pascual-Leone; W Poppendieck; A Priori; S Rossi; P M Rossini; J Rothwell; M A Rueger; G Ruffini; K Schellhorn; H R Siebner; Y Ugawa; A Wexler; U Ziemann; M Hallett; W Paulus Journal: Clin Neurophysiol Date: 2017-06-19 Impact factor: 3.708
Authors: Zeinab Esmaeilpour; Paola Marangolo; Benjamin M Hampstead; Sven Bestmann; Elisabeth Galletta; Helena Knotkova; Marom Bikson Journal: Brain Stimul Date: 2017-12-13 Impact factor: 8.955
Authors: Kelsey A Potter-Baker; Daniel P Janini; Yin-Liang Lin; Vishwanath Sankarasubramanian; David A Cunningham; Nicole M Varnerin; Patrick Chabra; Kevin L Kilgore; Mary Ann Richmond; Frederick S Frost; Ela B Plow Journal: J Spinal Cord Med Date: 2017-08-07 Impact factor: 1.985
Authors: Joyce G Rohan; Kim A Carhuatanta; Shawn M McInturf; Molly K Miklasevich; Ryan Jankord Journal: J Neurosci Date: 2015-09-16 Impact factor: 6.167
Authors: Syed Faraz Kazim; Christian A Bowers; Chad D Cole; Samantha Varela; Zafar Karimov; Erick Martinez; Jonathan V Ogulnick; Meic H Schmidt Journal: Mol Neurobiol Date: 2021-08-03 Impact factor: 5.590