Literature DB >> 26213216

An unexpected target of spinal direct current stimulation: Interhemispheric connectivity in humans.

Tommaso Bocci1, Matteo Caleo2, Beatrice Vannini3, Maurizio Vergari4, Filippo Cogiamanian4, Simone Rossi5, Alberto Priori4, Ferdinando Sartucci6.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Transcutaneous spinal Direct Current Stimulation (tsDCS) is a noninvasive technique based on the application of weak electrical currents over spinal cord. NEW
METHOD: We studied the effects of tsDCS on interhemispheric motor connectivity and visual processing by evaluating changes in ipsilateral Silent Period (iSP), Transcallosal Conduction Time (TCT) and hemifield Visual Evoked Potentials (hVEPs), before (T0) and at a different intervals following sham, anodal and cathodal tsDCS (T9-T11 level, 2.0 mA, 20'). Motor Evoked Potentials (MEPs) were recorded from abductor pollicis brevis (APB), abductor hallucis (AH) and deltoid muscles. hVEPs were recorded bilaterally by reversal of a horizontal square wave grating with the display positioned in the right hemifield.
RESULTS: Anodal tsDCS increased TCT (p < 0.001) and the interhemispheric delay for both the main VEP components (N1: p = 0.0003; P1: p < 0.0001), dampening at the same time iSP duration (APB: p < 0.0001; AH: p = 0.0005; deltoid: p < 0.0001), while cathodal stimulation elicited opposite effects (p < 0.0001). DISCUSSION: tsDCS modulates interhemispheric processing in a polarity-specific manner, with anodal stimulation leading to a functional disconnection between hemispheres. tsDCS would be a new promising therapeutic tool in managing a number of human diseases characterized by an impaired interhemispheric balance, or an early rehabilitation strategy in patients with acute brain lesions, when other non-invasive brain stimulation techniques (NIBS) are not indicated due to safety concerns.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Corpus callosum; Hemifield visual evoked potentials; Interhemispheric processing; Ipsilateral silent period; Supraspinal effects; Transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation; Visual system; tsDCS

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26213216     DOI: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2015.07.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosci Methods        ISSN: 0165-0270            Impact factor:   2.390


  13 in total

Review 1.  Low intensity transcranial electric stimulation: Safety, ethical, legal regulatory and application guidelines.

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

2.  Repeated cathodal transspinal pulse and direct current stimulation modulate cortical and corticospinal excitability differently in healthy humans.

Authors:  Lynda M Murray; Maria Knikou
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2019-05-11       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation improves locomotor learning in healthy humans.

Authors:  Oluwole O Awosika; Marco Sandrini; Rita Volochayev; Ryan M Thompson; Nathan Fishman; Tianxia Wu; Mary Kay Floeter; Mark Hallett; Leonardo G Cohen
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2019-01-29       Impact factor: 8.955

4.  The effect of cathodal transspinal direct current stimulation on tibialis anterior stretch reflex components in humans.

Authors:  Eva Rudjord Therkildsen; Jens Bo Nielsen; Mikkel Malling Beck; Tomofumi Yamaguchi; Jakob Lorentzen
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2021-10-22       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Moving Beyond the Brain: Transcutaneous Spinal Direct Current Stimulation in Post-Stroke Aphasia.

Authors:  Paola Marangolo; Valentina Fiori; Jacob Shofany; Tommaso Gili; Carlo Caltagirone; Gabriella Cucuzza; Alberto Priori
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2017-08-08       Impact factor: 4.003

6.  Static magnetic field stimulation applied over the cervical spinal cord can decrease corticospinal excitability in finger muscle.

Authors:  Kento Nakagawa; Kimitaka Nakazawa
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol Pract       Date:  2018-02-23

Review 7.  Beyond the target area: an integrative view of tDCS-induced motor cortex modulation in patients and athletes.

Authors:  Edgard Morya; Kátia Monte-Silva; Marom Bikson; Zeinab Esmaeilpour; Claudinei Eduardo Biazoli; Andre Fonseca; Tommaso Bocci; Faranak Farzan; Raaj Chatterjee; Jeffrey M Hausdorff; Daniel Gomes da Silva Machado; André Russowsky Brunoni; Eva Mezger; Luciane Aparecida Moscaleski; Rodrigo Pegado; João Ricardo Sato; Marcelo Salvador Caetano; Kátia Nunes Sá; Clarice Tanaka; Li Min Li; Abrahão Fontes Baptista; Alexandre Hideki Okano
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2019-11-15       Impact factor: 4.262

8.  Transspinal Direct Current Stimulation Produces Persistent Plasticity in Human Motor Pathways.

Authors:  Lynda M Murray; Behdad Tahayori; Maria Knikou
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-01-15       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  The effect of transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation on corticospinal excitability in chronic incomplete spinal cord injury.

Authors:  Elizabeth Salmon Powell; Cheryl Carrico; Emily Salyers; Philip M Westgate; Lumy Sawaki
Journal:  NeuroRehabilitation       Date:  2018       Impact factor: 2.138

10.  Transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation increases corticospinal transmission and enhances voluntary motor output in humans.

Authors:  Tomofumi Yamaguchi; Mikkel M Beck; Eva R Therkildsen; Christian Svane; Christian Forman; Jakob Lorentzen; Bernard A Conway; Jesper Lundbye-Jensen; Svend S Geertsen; Jens B Nielsen
Journal:  Physiol Rep       Date:  2020-08
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.