Vera Moliadze1, Till Schmanke2, Saskia Andreas2, Ekaterina Lyzhko2, Christine M Freitag2, Michael Siniatchkin3. 1. Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Psychosomatics and Psychotherapy, Goethe-University Frankfurt am Main, Deutschordenstr. 50, D-60528 Frankfurt am Main, Germany; Department of Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, Schleswig-Holstein University Hospital (UK-SH), Campus Kiel, Schwanenweg 20, 24105 Kiel, Germany. Electronic address: moliadze@med-psych.uni-kiel.de. 2. Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Psychosomatics and Psychotherapy, Goethe-University Frankfurt am Main, Deutschordenstr. 50, D-60528 Frankfurt am Main, Germany. 3. Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Psychosomatics and Psychotherapy, Goethe-University Frankfurt am Main, Deutschordenstr. 50, D-60528 Frankfurt am Main, Germany; Department of Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, Schleswig-Holstein University Hospital (UK-SH), Campus Kiel, Schwanenweg 20, 24105 Kiel, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to investigate the effect of the transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on motor cortex excitability in healthy children and adolescents. METHODS: We applied 1mA anodal or cathodal tDCS for 10min on the left primary motor cortex of 19 healthy children and adolescents (mean age 13.9±0.4years). In order to prove whether the effects of tDCS may be attributed to the stimulation intensity, 10 children and adolescents were studied again using 0.5mA anodal and cathodal tDCS. Sham stimulation was used as a control. RESULTS: Compared with sham stimulation, both 1mA anodal and cathodal tDCS resulted in a significant increase of Motor evoked potentials (MEP) amplitudes which remained to be prominent even one hour after the end of stimulation. Interestingly, the 0.5mA cathodal tDCS decreased cortico-spinal excitability whereas the 0.5mA anodal stimulation did not result in any effect. CONCLUSION: For the first time, the study demonstrates age-specific influences of tDCS on cortical excitability of the primary motor cortex. SIGNIFICANCE: Thus, the stimulation protocols of the tDCS have to be optimized according to age by planning studies in pediatric population.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to investigate the effect of the transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on motor cortex excitability in healthy children and adolescents. METHODS: We applied 1mA anodal or cathodal tDCS for 10min on the left primary motor cortex of 19 healthy children and adolescents (mean age 13.9±0.4years). In order to prove whether the effects of tDCS may be attributed to the stimulation intensity, 10 children and adolescents were studied again using 0.5mA anodal and cathodal tDCS. Sham stimulation was used as a control. RESULTS: Compared with sham stimulation, both 1mA anodal and cathodal tDCS resulted in a significant increase of Motor evoked potentials (MEP) amplitudes which remained to be prominent even one hour after the end of stimulation. Interestingly, the 0.5mA cathodal tDCS decreased cortico-spinal excitability whereas the 0.5mA anodal stimulation did not result in any effect. CONCLUSION: For the first time, the study demonstrates age-specific influences of tDCS on cortical excitability of the primary motor cortex. SIGNIFICANCE: Thus, the stimulation protocols of the tDCS have to be optimized according to age by planning studies in pediatric population.
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: Bruce Crosson; Benjamin M Hampstead; Lisa C Krishnamurthy; Venkatagiri Krishnamurthy; Keith M McGregor; Joe R Nocera; Simone Roberts; Amy D Rodriguez; Stella M Tran Journal: Neuropsychology Date: 2017-08-31 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Marom Bikson; Pnina Grossman; Chris Thomas; Adantchede Louis Zannou; Jimmy Jiang; Tatheer Adnan; Antonios P Mourdoukoutas; Greg Kronberg; Dennis Truong; Paulo Boggio; André R Brunoni; Leigh Charvet; Felipe Fregni; Brita Fritsch; Bernadette Gillick; Roy H Hamilton; Benjamin M Hampstead; Ryan Jankord; Adam Kirton; Helena Knotkova; David Liebetanz; Anli Liu; Colleen Loo; Michael A Nitsche; Janine Reis; Jessica D Richardson; Alexander Rotenberg; Peter E Turkeltaub; Adam J Woods Journal: Brain Stimul Date: 2016-06-15 Impact factor: 8.955
Authors: Mohammad Ali Salehinejad; Vahid Nejati; Mohsen Mosayebi-Samani; Ali Mohammadi; Miles Wischnewski; Min-Fang Kuo; Alessio Avenanti; Carmelo M Vicario; Michael A Nitsche Journal: Neurosci Bull Date: 2020-05-16 Impact factor: 5.203